Official sexiest man alive Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson and unofficial cutest man alive Lin-Manuel Miranda teamed up to make a little something called “Millennials: The Musical.” Yes, don’t worry, it’s a parody. 

The short, 14-minute musical chronicles the forbidden love story between Crystal (an app-addled, selfie-obsessed millennial) and her neighbor Jack (an accountant who uses an actual map, like made out of paper). 

The two 20-somethings attempt to overcome their lifestyle differences while scouring a juice bar/yoga studio and EDM club for Crystal’s missing iPhone. References to 2016 abound.

The resulting production is no “Hamilton,” let’s be clear on that. But it’s still, as the kids say, quite lit. If you’ve ever wanted to watch young people sing and dance about Bumble, Harambe, Burning Man, Lena Dunham and Netflix-and-chilling, hit play below. 

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

You can be highbrow. You can be lowbrow. But can you ever just be brow? Welcome to Middlebrow, a weekly examination of pop culture.

Fans have finally had the chance to see Amy Sherman-Palladino and Daniel Palladino’s long-awaited conclusion to “Gilmore Girls,” after the revival hit Netflix on Friday.

It was good to be back in Stars Hollow. But Lorelai and, especially, Rory revealed some interesting character developments that cry out for further exploration: a laissez-faire attitude toward both underwear and fidelity; a tenuous understanding of the journalism profession, the interview process and trail hiking; and, of course, the unremitting certainty that life inside and outside Stars Hollow is all about the Mademoiselles Gilmore.

Based on Rory’s character arc, which seems to be spiraling down rather than growing in the traditional direction, here are a few pitches for scenes from a second season of “Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life.”

*****

Open on Rory and Lorelai sitting at the gazebo. “So, I’m thinking about getting an abortion,” says Rory. “Yeah, good call,” says Lorelai. End series.

*****

Open on Rory and Lorelai sitting at the gazebo. Lorelai looks stricken. “I am pregnant ... with my first memoir!” adds Rory. “My book about you having a baby is my baby.” Lorelai is stone-faced. “Condè  Nast wants to publish it!” says Rory. “Probably! I just have to pitch it to them, first.” Condè Nast does not want to publish Rory’s book, which is not mentioned again for the remainder of the series.

*****

Open on Rory and Lorelai sitting at the gazebo. “Who’s the father?” asks Lorelai. “I don’t know how it’s even possible,” says Rory. “I haven’t slept with anyone in months.” “Oh, come on, we had sex five weeks ago!” explodes Paul. The women, previously unaware that Paul was present, stare at him with mild curiosity. “Who’s that?” asks Lorelai. “Fuck if I know,” says Rory.

*****

Open on Rory and Lorelai sitting at the gazebo. “Who’s the father?” asks Lorelai. “Logan,” says Rory. “Logan? Like, your-ex-who-just-got-engaged Logan?” “Yeah.” “Aww, honey,” says Lorelai, squeezing Rory’s arm affectionately and beaming. “You’re such a good kid.”

*****

Open three months later, at the gazebo. Rory and Lorelai are sitting at the gazebo, drinking coffee, as Rory massages her growing baby bump. “So,” Rory says slowly, “I have some news.” “Yeah?” says Lorelai. “I’ve been so worried about being alone and raising the baby by myself,” says Rory. “But, well ... Stars Hollow proposed. It loves me more than anything, OK? It wants to raise the baby with me. It makes me feel safe.” Lorelei smiles tearfully. “Full freaking circle,” she whispers.

*****

Open at Logan and Odette’s wedding. Suddenly, Rory, seated in the crowd, gently clears her throat. All eyes are immediately on her. “Ace, what are you doing here?” says Logan, incredulous, rushing to her side. “Logan, we’re having a baby,” says Rory. “I know we had a deal ― no strings ― but I thought you should know.” “Cool,” says Logan, leaning in and softly tongue-kissing her. “I’m gonna go get married now.”

*****

Open one year later at the gazebo. Lorelai and Rory are sitting together. Rory is feeding a baby bottle of hot java to her infant daughter. “It’s a lifestyle,” she says. “It’s a religion,” says Lorelai. They get up to buy tacos, arm in arm. Forty minutes later, Rory runs back to the gazebo, shrieking, “I’m sorry! I’m sorry! I forgot you were here!” She skids to a halt and picks up the baby’s car seat. Lorelai follows behind, annoyed. “You have got to adopt that kid out.” “I know, I know,” Rory sighs. “I just keep forgetting.”

*****

Open one year later on the darkened porch of Lorelai and Luke’s house. Rory and Jess are sitting together talking as the adults bustle around inside. “So, did you really lose all your underwear?” says Jess, his eyes soft with longing. “Yeah, kinda,” laughs Rory. “What have you been wearing?” “Just the same pair I have on.” “Don’t you need to take them off and wash them?” asks Jess, incredulous. Rory blushes sweetly. “I don’t really secrete bodily fluids or anything.” “My God,” says Jess. “You’re so beautiful.” They have sex.

*****

Open one year later at the gazebo. Lorelai, Luke and Rory are sitting together on the steps. “So I’ve been thinking,” says Luke. “Rory, I’d like to adopt you. I’ve always wanted a daughter, and you’re like the child I never had.” “What about April?” asks Rory. “Who?” says Luke. “Super proud!” says Lorelai. 

*****

Open one year later at the gazebo. Lorelai and Rory are sitting together. “Where’s the kid?” says Lorelai. “With Lane,” says Rory. “Or Paris. Or Didi. Or my underwear box.” “You’re really doing this single mom thing, kid,” Lorelai tells her affectionately. The child is finally seen at the end of the last episode. She is pregnant. (BOMBSHELL!!)

*****

Open one year later at the gazebo. Lorelai and Rory are drinking coffee together. “Mom?” says Rory. “Yeah?” says Lorelai. “I finally found my underwear!” “Where was it?” asks Lorelai. “Everyone in Stars Hollow raided my box to take a pair to keep under their pillow,” says Rory with a shrug. “This town is mob-ruled!”

*****

Open one year later at the gazebo. Lorelai, Rory and Luke are sitting together. Rory is holding her infant. “I love getting the whole family together,” says Lorelai. “What about April?” says Luke. “Who?” says Lorelai. “April, my daughter.” “Sorry,” says Lorelai, “I don’t think I’ve ever met her.”

*****

Open one year later at Lorelai and Luke’s house. Lorelai bursts into the kitchen, worked into a lather, and exclaims, “I’m doing Into the Wild!” “Book or movie?” asks Luke. “Book, obviously,” says Lorelai. “You’re going to hate dying slowly of mysterious exposure-related causes in the wilderness,” remarks Luke grumpily. “Maybe,” says Lorelai, determined. “But this is something I really need to do for me.”

*****

Three years later. Lorelai picks up her phone and dials a number. “Hi, Mom!” she says. “How’s Nantucket? Listen, you’re a terrible mother and I’ll never really love you, OK? God, I’m sorry!” She hangs up just as Rory appears. “What’s up?” says Rory. “Ugh, my mom is so impossible,” says Lorelai. “This conflict is going to take at least three episodes to properly resolve.”

*****

Three years later, at the gazebo. Lorelai and Rory are sitting together, swigging from gigantic empty coffee cups. David Remnick walks by, taking in the beautiful autumn scene, when Rory catches his eye. “Excuse me, young lady,” he says, hurrying over. “Aren’t you Rory Gilmore? THE Rory Gilmore?” “I’ll cop to that,” she blushes. “You wrote that Talk of the Town piece that has gripped the entire media world for four years! At The New Yorker, we’ve been searching for you nonstop! There’s a job waiting for you, whenever you want it.” “Ehhh,” says Rory. “I mean, you’re not exactly Condé Nast, and I have some irons in the fire.”

*****

Three years later, at the gazebo. Lorelai and Rory are sitting together, miming that they’re eating doughnuts and drinking coffee. “I can’t believe how much they cut the prop budget this season,” says Rory.

 *****

Three years later, in Stars Hollow. Rory is walking through the streets holding a Pop Tart delicately between her fingers and nibbling at it like a squirrel. Lane is leaving her house. “Hey Lane!” says Rory. “Can I come look for my box of underwear? I’m still going commando.” “I actually burned it all two years ago,” says Lane. “Right around the time my mother died and you didn’t notice.” “How’s Zack?” Rory asks. “We got divorced,” says Lane. “I’m so glad we’re still so close,” Rory exclaims, reaching out her stiff Barbie arms to embrace Lane. “Like sisters.”

*****

Forty years later, at the gazebo. Lorelai and Rory are sitting together, drinking coffee and enjoying the crisp fall air. With them is Rory’s daughter, Vivienne Jolie-Pitt. There’s a movement in the bushes, ands Max, Chris, Digger and Mr. Coffee shuffle out. “Lorelai, are you happy?” they ask in a four-part harmony. Lorelai turns to Rory. “I’m pregnant,” she says.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

We all know George R. R. Martin needs to get a move on and give us the next book in his A Song of Ice and Fire series.

But he’s got some tequila to drink first.

Martin took to his blog to tell readers that he plans to spend most of 2017 working on the forthcoming book, The Winds of Winter ― the sixth and penultimate in the fantasy series ― and that he doesn’t have many appearances scheduled for 2017.

The author also explained that his last 2016 appearance would take place in Guadalajara, Mexico, and that he planned to show up to the event, drink some tequila and then get on with his writing.

Here’s a brief excerpt from the post:

I’m one of the guests at the conference. I’ll be doing interviews, a press conference, a live streaming event, and a signing. I expect I will be doing some tequila tasting as well. I am informed that Guadalajara is the tequila capital of Mexico.

Oh, George. We love ya, and you deserve some shots. But ... Please finish this series soon.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

This article first appeared on QuietRev.com

I’m not a scientist—I am a practitioner of public education as an administrator. Yet, in my teaching days before I entered admin, I noticed certain trends in a segment of my classroom and school that I dubbed “Quiet Black Girl Syndrome.” I assembled data from daily interactions and from observing my students at recess or in academic settings, and I didn’t initially have a descriptor for it. I simply noted what happened to the Black girls in class who didn’t speak up often.

It’s to my detriment that I didn’t see it as an introverted issue. In fact, had I realized this was tied to the temperament spectrum, I could have collected resources and sought out social and emotional assistance for them. But early on, I didn’t even realize these girls were suffering; that discovery came during a tense parent/teacher conference.

My student, Starre, was incredibly bright and always turned in her work. She had straight As; she occasionally struggled with a concept, but she worked so hard that I didn’t bother worrying about her. It embarrasses me now to think about this, but let me say again: I didn’t bother worrying about her. She became wallpaper in my classroom. I often forgot to call on her during discussions and critical conversations about learning. Some days when I took attendance and she wasn’t there, I failed to notice it and just marked her “present.” I’d think back later to the class period: “Did I see Starre in class today? Hmm. I can’t remember.”

Starre, and girls like her, oftentimes begin the process of becoming invisible in the classroom. This invisibility fully manifests in adulthood, in the ways that Black women must move through the world. It’s kind of a phenomenon that we educators conflate “quiet” with “good.” We call them “good Black girls” because we don’t have to deal with them, while we allow other—louder—students to take our attention in the classroom. Because they’re so “good,” we expect them to behave all the time, which doesn’t give them the space to be individuals or growing adolescents. Making these assumptions about them fails to include them or support them in their growth—and their exclusion impacts all of us.

It’s an ugly truth that the outcomes of students’ learning are dependent on their self-presentation. Young students who are female and Black are already dealing with the intersections that marginalize them. When they’re quiet too—truly introverted—I have to admit, I’ve failed them on multiple levels in the past. When those girls find their voices and begin to assert themselves, they are often shut down and asked to return to the quiet girls we once knew and ignored. The shutting down stems from racially problematic and historic issues within the larger culture.

Educators like to call it an “achievement” gap, but I much prefer to say it’s an “access” gap—this label better reflects the context of the lesser quality education that students of color have historically been offered.

“Access gap” also speaks to housing discrimination. Each district’s educational dollars are based on local state housing tax income, thus directly attaching the educational quality of our schools to the wealth in the area: the wealthier a community is, the better their schools can be.

Education reformers like to label these schools as “failing” when the reality is they are being made to fail. The lesser access to quality education leads to beliefs of lesser ability. Research shows that white male teachers are 10 to 20 percent more likely to have low expectations for Black female students. The data doesn’t lie; we continue to learn that Black girls are victims of a kind of double jeopardy “wherein they are disadvantaged because of negative race stereotypes and negative gender stereotypes.”

Starre’s mother helped me see this bias, which, even though I myself am a Black female educator, I am still prey to, in our conference. She wasn’t angry with me, but the full weight of her frustration—of constantly fighting for her daughter’s involvement and recognition in the classroom—came to rest at my feet that day. Why, she wondered, was her daughter never asked to be one of the student ambassadors who took people on tours of the school? Why was she never nominated for Student of the Month? Her mother had seen photos on our website of those celebrations, overrun with mostly white, middle-class students whose parents attended the PTO meetings. Why didn’t I challenge her daughter, when I knew she was capable of more than the mediocre work I was accepting?

Nothing about her questions was easy for me. I thanked her for homing my attention on her quiet, introverted girl, who was developing along with her peers but to whom we paid no attention because she wasn’t a problem in the classroom. Without the focus we denied her, Starre could move through school lithely, but what a missed opportunity for us to push her towards reaching her potential!

Starre was a good Black girl, and she fell on the temperament spectrum as introverted. She did her work, completed assignments, and faithfully met classwork requirements. I was failing her by assuming that was all she could achieve. And by ignoring her, I was missing out on the potential impact of a great student who could offer much more than the surface revealed.

It doesn’t take a scientist or clinician to see how schools can fail students who are people of color, but a huge piece of future impact would be to consider that they can be introverts too and that educators need to respond to their needs.

Love Quiet Revolution’s parenting articles? Listen to Quiet—our new podcast for parents and educators of quiet kids hosted by bestselling author Susan Cain. We’ve also developed a Parenting Quiet Kids online course, including expert advice, tools, and strategies. Take our free quiz to learn more!

This article originally appeared on QuietRev.com.

You can find more insights from Quiet Revolution on work, life, and parenting as an introvert at QuietRev.com.


Follow Quiet Revolution on Facebook and Twitter.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

“Art gone bad.” That’s how Jennifer Mayo described the circumstances that landed her in prison. The more technical terms are forgery and fraud. “I was misdirecting my energies and talents,” she joked. 

Mayo, now 38, was born in Corpus Christie, Texas, where she’s lived pretty much ever since. Her mother was a painter and ceramicist, so Mayo was in the vicinity of creative expression from a young age. Though she herself doodled and painted a bit, she didn’t start creating art in earnest until she was incarcerated. 

“In there it became a — I don’t know how to say it — a way to survive,” Mayo explained in an interview with The Huffington Post. The artist’s work is now on view as part of “On the Inside,” an exhibition comprised entirely of work by imprisoned LGBTQ artists. The show, curated by Tatiana von Furstenberg ― daughter of designer Diane von Furstenberg ― is currently being shown at Manhattan’s Abrons Arts Center.

All of the artworks on view are made from materials accessible to prisoners ― in many cases, dull pencil on letter-sized paper; but in others, more unorthodox materials are used, like deodorant or an asthma inhaler filled with Kool-Aid. The images primarily depict people, including civil rights leaders, Rihanna, Jesus Christ, and a large selection of self-portraits, depicting the artists beyond the bars that physically confine them. 

“I wanted to engage with LGBTQ prisoners because I know that they feel forgotten, and have the least support outside,” Furstenberg told The New York Times. “Art basically is the highest form of soul expression. Through this art, people really get to express their highest self. And I wanted to do an exhibit to show the world that there are a lot of talented, complex human beings with no voices behind bars.” 

The exhibition was conceived of in collaboration with Black & Pink, a grassroots organization comprised entirely of formerly incarcerated individuals working to meet the needs of LGBTQ prisoners around the country.

Jason Lydon, the national director and founder of Black & Pink, explained the importance of the exhibition in a panel that accompanied the show, as reported by Broadly. “They are creating things to inform our work and what we do on the outside, to ensure that not only this art moves us to feel solidarity but to fuel a call to action,” he said. “This creativity should not just be locked behind walls or in some shows. It needs to be free. It needs to escape back into the community.” 

For many artists in the exhibition, art offers an opportunity for artists to express their identities on their own terms. This gesture is especially crucial for transgender women who are forced to live out their sentences in male prisons, where they’re often subjected to horrific physical and psychological abuse. For many of these artists, art offered a rare chance for them to escape their physical realities.

Mayo, however, had different motivations for delving deeper into her artistic craft after entering the prison system. “It’s a form of currency,” she said. “In a Texas prison, if you have no help from the outside and no money coming in, they supply you with two-inch bars of soap and a package of tooth powder. No shampoo, no deodorant. It’s rough to make it if you don’t have help. If you can make decent things, though, especially in the women’s prison, you can trade your talent for the things you need.”

Behind bars, Mayo gained a following for her adroitly constructed crafts, which inmates would then gift to their loved ones and families. She was most proud of her moving greeting cards, which she created by cutting up cereal boxes with a broken down shaving razor, and gluing together parts with adhesive made from powdered milk. 

“I got a bit of a reputation for those, people would come from all over the unit to get them,” Mayo said. She later taught herself the basics of paper quilling, making small sculptures from hundreds of strips of paper, and figured out how to make shadow boxes from pieces of cardboard. On average, Mayo had a two-week waiting list for prisoners and officers eager to purchase her creations. 

“Without the art I don’t think I would have made it,” Mayo said. “It gave me an outlet, a way to consume my time. I was never sitting out in the rec. yard or watching TV. I was the one at the table in the back, drawing.”

When drawing for herself, Mayo commonly opted for expressive depictions of women. When making art on the job, however, customers usually requested pop culture figures like Care Bears, Spider-Man or Dora the Explorer. Jail bars, hearts, and handcuffs were also common motifs. Mayo, who is a lesbian, added that she’d throw in a gay pride flag in the background when she sensed any sort of homophobia from her clientele. 

When Mayo entered the prison system, she explained, she was out as a lesbian. With an aesthetic she described as “masculine” and a gay pride tattoo on her leg, Mayo’s sexual preferences, she expressed, were clearly legible to the outside world. Being gay in a woman’s prison, however, yielded immense social capital, and shortly after being locked up, Mayo started receiving love notes from secret admirers written on toilet paper. Determined not to get involved in a relationship, and all the drama that predictably ensues, Mayo kept to herself, drawing in solitude and “taking the high road.”

Mayo, who was released from prison after a six-year sentence, was one of the few exhibiting artists to visit “On the Inside” in person. The experience was bittersweet. “It was awesome to see, but very humbling to know that [the other artists] are still [in prison.] There were so many friends I made when I was there that will never leave the system.”

Following her release, Mayo had difficulty finding work, and described her departure from prison life just as traumatic as her entrance into it. She got hired at a dollar store, and supplemented her income by selling artwork at local craft fairs. Although Mayo enjoys the occasional museum visit, she never seriously considered pursuing a traditional art career or education.

“Someone once told me, ‘Going to art school would probably ruin you,’” she said. “I like to look at other people’s stuff. But for the most part I couldn’t really tell a van Gogh from a Monet. I don’t have a background in it.”

These days, Mayo doesn’t draw quite as much. She is busy with what she jokingly called a “grown-up job.” Somewhat incongruously, Mayo attributed her exceptional work ethic to her time behind bars, where inmates were forced to work 45 hours per week without pay. “I will say that prison did make me a very good employee,” she pronounced with a dark sense of humor. “For six years I was never late to work, I never called in sick.”

Aside from being featured in her first art exhibition, Mayo’s proudest recent accomplishment is purchasing a sailboat. Her ultimate dream, when parole is up, is to sail around the world. Of all the artists included in “On the Inside,” Mayo perhaps has the story with the happiest ending. Against the odds, she has managed to piece her life together. In part, she has her artistic talent to thank.

“I think art has always been a part of who I am,” she said. “In times of stress it was extremely crucial to my identity. When I was incarcerated, I’m the one they went to. That’s who I was.”

“On the Inside” runs until Dec. 18, 2016 at Abrons Arts Center in New York. See images from the exhibition below. 

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Awards season is upon us. The Booker Prize went to its first American recipient, Paul Beatty; The National Book Award went to the deserving Underground Railroad by Colson Whitehead; the Literary Review’s Bad Sex Award ― given to the writer who stumbles most failingly through bedroom dalliances ― went to Erri De Luca, author of The Day Before Happiness.

Luca is the 24th recipient of the award, which, it seems, serves the purpose of highlighting pat or uncomfortable writing by otherwise good literary authors. One of this year’s nominees is on the faculty at the Iowa Writer’s Workshop; recent winners and nominees have included Morrissey, Erica Jong and Lauren Groff.

The Bad Sex Awards, then, aim to highlight an opinion many literary critics seem to share: writing about sex is ― forgive us ― hard. Hard as the Sunday crossword. Hard as a big ol’ diamond. Hackneyed metaphors abound. Clinical language creeps in. In backward attempts to deviate from the same-old story, otherwise emotionally resonant authors have their women characters masturbate on doorknobs.

What gives? It could be that sex ― an act we, as a culture, still regard as magical ― is cringe-inducing when depicted with something as concrete as language. But are sex scenes not also an opportunity to examine a bevy of other topics, like gender politics or power dynamics?

To show the flip side of the Bad Sex Awards ― and the writers daringly using sex to comment on big issues ― we decided to highlight some of 2016’s best sex writing below. 

Garth Greenwell

Author of What Belongs to You

Greenwell’s novel explores a relationship between two men who meet in the public bathroom in the National Palace of Culture in Sofia, Bulgaria. The narrator pays the object of his desire ― Mitko ― for sex, and a fraught, monthslong connection between the two ensues. 

“I actually think it’s kind of a myth that sex is harder to write than other things,” Greenwell told HuffPost. “I think everything is hard to write.” 

He sees sex writing as an opportunity to connect our bodies with our inner thoughts ― a task that’d be even harder to pull off in less interior art forms, like movies or visual art.

“We live in a culture where we seem surrounded by images of bodies,” Greenwell said. “The thing that literature as a technology does better than any other technology we have is allow access to the experience of another person’s consciousness. Literature has a really important role to play in this hyper-eroticized culture that we have, by presenting not just bodies but embodied-ness, and by exploring acts of sex between people as moments of ethical and emotional complexity.”

Greenwell regards this work as important ― urgent, even ― especially for women, queer writers, and others whose sexual independence has been disregarded.

But just because writing about sex is, for him, a political act, doesn’t mean sex writing can’t also be sexy. Just because it’s literature doesn’t mean it’s not meant to elicit arousal, Greenwell says.

“But I think what distinguishes art from pornography, or the less-interesting pornography that we seem to be surrounded by, is that art never intends that as a sole response,” he added. “Art never intends a singular response. It’s also other things; it also causes you to question that response of arousal.”

For more great sex writing, Greenwell suggests reading Lidia Yuknavitch, Merritt Tierce and Kim Fu.

Jade Sharma

Author of Problems

For Sharma, the answer to writing about sex is simple: just don’t filter it. Her novel Problems centers on Maya, an NYC bookstore employee whose life starts to unravel when her husband and her lover both decide to end their relationships. 

“I just use the language I use and my friends use: masturbated, pussy, clit, came, hard, cock, porn,” she told HuffPost. “Sex is a part of life. Art is supposed to mirror life.”

“I write realistically, like attempting to write how people actually talk and think. And I get plenty of backlash, like people telling me I’m disgusting,” Sharma said. “I had a comment once about a scene where my female character is home alone and she masturbates and I got such a harsh reaction from my classmates in workshops and one of them was like, ‘It came out of nowhere.’ And I was like, ‘Yeah, she also eats yogurt out of nowhere. She’s home alone, so what’s the difference?’ Like why is it any less banal than a young woman eating yogurt?”

Because she weaves the ordinariness of sex into other quotidian actions, Sharma finds the feedback that her work is somehow either gross or revolutionary irksome. “It’s not like I’m so subversive,” she said. “I didn’t write Naked Lunch or anything. It’s not so crazy.”

She hopes that her writing will allow readers to see themselves on the page, to form a connection or to feel as though their actions aren’t strange or shameful.

“If you can make anyone feel less alone, like they’re not a freak, it’s probably the best thing you can do in art,” Sharma said.

For more great sex writing, Sharma suggests reading Eileen Myles, Erica Jong and Emily Carter.

Rebecca Schiff

Author of The Bed Moved

Schiff’s stories are quick and funny, often flirting with the absurd.

A woman finds topless boxing porn on her dad’s computer. Another woman struggles to be the dumper in a fizzling relationship. Yet another woman gives a blowjob in an open-air bath intended as a zen retreat, an escape from everyday desires. The recipient is a weed grower she’s been seeing who can’t seem to scrounge up enough money to pay for things like his ticket into said spa. The two of them fumble around before getting kicked out in a scene that’s both funny and smartly cued into the way our bodies can illustrate things like our neuroses, or the power structures we’re beholden to.

Schiff, then, sees sex scenes as avenues for discussing bigger issues. They only become tricky when the language starts to mirror clinical speak ― or the tired verbiage of sexting.

“Sex writing can easily become cliché because the words and phrases people use to arouse each other almost come from a script,” Schiff told HuffPost. “When you’re writing a sex scene in a work of fiction, you have to push past that script, and find new language.”

For more great sex writing, Schiff suggests reading Mary Gaitskill.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

For the past two years, photographer Clayton Woodley has been traveling the world, determined to capture images that appear strange and otherworldly.

His series “Dreams to Awaken” chronicles the most surreal moments from the artist’s travels to over 30 countries and six continents, in which tree silhouettes, desert expanses, lush jungles and rock formations are accentuated by a mysteriously nude female figure cloaked in fabric.

While his concept is hardly new ― other male photographers have ventured around the world to place a woman’s body in a static landscape with little context provided ― his self-proclaimed dedication to a nomadic lifestyle is certainly curious. 

“After a life-changing accident in which I broke my back, I left my gig as a touring music photographer to travel the world, ‘find myself,’ and create art,” he told Ignant, recounting shots taken in Namibia, Socotra, Iceland and Bolivia. 

Photos from his travels will be on view from Dec. 9 until Jan. 8 at SHIM Gallery in Brooklyn. You can RSVP to the opening reception on Woodley’s website.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

In the 1980s, Michael Alig was your average young person looking to leave his small hometown in search of something bigger, better and brighter.

He made the move from South Bend, Indiana, to New York City to attend university in the mid-‘80s. But instead of becoming just another student in the Big Apple, he became a college dropout, nightlife royalty, and eventually, a murderer. 

The rise and fall of the self-proclaimed “King of the Club Kids” has been the subject of plenty of profiles and films, including the Macaulay Culkin-led “Party Monster” and the more recent documentary “Glory Daze: The Life and Times of Michael Alig,” available to stream on Netflix starting Dec. 1. The film provides a lengthy, informational look at Alig’s life through interviews with him and anecdotes from fellow former club kids like Ernie Glam and Kenny Kenny.

Alig, who was released from prison in 2014 after serving a 17-year sentence for murder (more on that later), spoke with The Huffington Post about the film, as well as the mark he left on the scene and what he hopes for the future of nightlife. 

For those who aren’t familiar, Alig became an iconic figure in the New York City club scene in the late ‘80s and early ‘90s. He led a resurgence in nightlife following the death of pop artist Andy Warhol, who, along with his band of superstars, were nightlife celebrities. Once Warhol died, the nightlife scene experienced a sort of depression, a period Alig described as a “black hole.” 

“Nobody was going out, and everybody really thought it was the end of nightlife,” Alig told HuffPost over the phone. “There were no new clubs on the horizon and the clubs that were open, that were built for 5,000, 6,000 people, they had literally 300 people in them. It looked so depressing.”

In Alig’s opinion, that slump was the perfect time to start something new. As he suggested, “everybody’s really hungry” for a change after a period of sadness. And so began his ascent up the New York City nightlife ladder. 

Alig started as a busboy at Danceteria, one of the era’s most vibrant nightclubs. (Madonna also had a stint as a waitress there.) As he explained, the job didn’t require much work but it opened the door to the glamorous world ― peopled by “professional personalities,” as he called them ― of which he so badly wanted to be a part.

“I thought, If I could get paid for having a big personality, what better job is there?” Alig said. 

Alig worked his way up to becoming a party promoter, and eventually began throwing his own parties at NYC clubs like Limelight, Area, The Palladium and The Palace, among others. In the beginning, things went well. The parties were lively, the clubs were full, and the people who generally saw themselves as outsiders had a place where they belonged.

One of the most infamous parties Alig orchestrated was an “outlaw party” that took place at a McDonald’s in Manhattan’s Times Square neighborhood. Village Voice columnist Michael Musto once described outlaw parties as “bashes illegally held at some public space or other, where everyone showed up on time for a change, knowing the cops would come and bust it up the second they got wind of it.” 

There were also the Disco 2000 parties, which Alig threw on Wednesday nights at Limelight. Musto once described them as “a place where people who were freaks in school could come from Iowa or New Jersey and reinvent themselves or dress up in their sisters’ clothes or just be what they wanted to be.”

But, like all good things, the era of parties came to an end. By the mid-’90s, it seemed all was winding down. 

“James [St. James, a fellow former club kid] says it went that way because people were bored,” Alig explained to HuffPost. “We were bored with everything going so well, getting in for free and being paid and free drinks, and so we just went the other way.”

According to Alig, people in the scene developed a destructive attitude ― an “I’ll show them! I’ll destroy myself!” mentality ― because everyone was “rebelling against something.” Alig himself explained he did drugs for the first time as an act of spite toward his boyfriend at the time.

It wasn’t long before Alig spiraled into a life of drug addiction, which came to a head one Sunday night in March 1996. 

That night, while high on a combination of heroin, cocaine, Special K (ketamine) and crystal meth, Alig (along with friend Robert “Freeze” Riggs) killed drug dealer Andre (aka Angel) Melendez, leaving his body in an ice-filled bath for a few days before dismembering it and disposing of it in the Hudson River. By that time, the era of the club kids had seemingly come to an end ― their “king” would go on to serve a 17-year prison sentence after pleading guilty to manslaughter. 

Today, Alig is a free man. His release in 2014 was major news. Alig, though somewhat reluctantly, admitted he liked the attention after years in prison. 

“I was like, I’ve been in solitary fucking confinement for five years and now Vanity Fair wants to talk to me? Of course! What do you think, I’m just going to say no?” he said. “It wasn’t like they were talking to me and saying, ‘Oh, isn’t it great you killed someone?’ They were interested in the story of the subculture that we created and how it had turned into what it did.” 

These days, Alig works on his art, which you can buy on his website. He’s also started the SkroddleSquad, what he calls “an online army dedicated to bringing together kooky, creative people interested in reshaping popular culture and taking over the world ... one freak at a time.” According to The New York Post, Alig is also getting back into the party business as a creative consultant at Manhattan club Rumpus Room. 

In Alig’s opinion, New York nightlife is nowhere near as fabulous as it used to be, and as he explained, people “come here expecting something that isn’t here, and I feel kind of responsible for that.” 

“I feel responsible for telling them about it and I feel responsible for it not being here anymore,” he added. “I feel like it’s my job to rectify the situation.”

If there’s one thing he’d like people to take away from his story ― both the ups and the downs ― he said, “I would like that legacy to continue. I would like younger people to pick up where that left off, and allow it to happen in their own way. Whatever way makes sense for their generation.” 

You can learn more about Alig’s outrageous life in “Glory Daze: The Life and Times of Michael Alig,” available now on Netflix. 

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

By now, most Americans recognize the quote above as belonging to president-elect Donald Trump. His 2005 rant bragging about sexually assaulting women, captured on the set of Access Hollywood, quickly became one of the most notorious reveals of the 2016 presidential campaign. 

Although Trump’s words could be considered to be among the most infamously degrading comments made about women’s bodies ― uttered by a prominent and powerful man in contemporary culture, no less ―  they face steep competition. Republican state lawmaker Lawrence Lockman, for example, asked in 2014: “If a woman has [the right to an abortion], why shouldn’t a man be free to use his superior strength to force himself on a woman? At least the rapist’s pursuit of sexual freedom doesn’t [usually] result in anyone’s death.”

In an upcoming project titled “We Hold These Truths To Be Self-Evident,” artists Natalie Frank and Zoë Buckman are publicizing the ignorant, misogynistic language employed by former and current politicians in relation to women’s bodies. And they are doing so via a massive mural.

“Researching the quotes was tough, emotionally,” Buckman said in an interview with The Huffington Post. “Seeing these words typed out, reading sentiment after sentiment of disrespect and hatred, the preposterous absence of science, fact, or reality, the utter lack of compassion, and the blatant misogyny: It’s blindingly clear that there is a war on women right now and that there always has been.”

“And the worst thing about it, is that these people are in positions of power. They’re not angry nobodies mouthing off about rape in their kitchen. They’re elected officials, elevated by society and rewarded with the ability to help govern our country.”
Zoë Buckman

The resounding message behind the project, as Frank explained to HuffPost, is that such comments aren’t merely erratic outbursts or outlandish soundbites. They have real consequences. “These words lead to legislation and real-world effects,” Frank said. “A lot of people were entertained by Donald Trump. It’s a lesson in how quickly words can become actions.” 

Frank is a figurative painter whose past works depict domestic spaces and classic fairy tales with a similar combination of grotesque elation and feminine power. This current project, a large vinyl mural, is completely new territory. But following the election, Frank expressed, she felt a need to do something. “Women have been so traumatized about the language Trump used,” she said, “the way he talks about sexual violence, the way he mocks it.”

Buckman has long created work with a feminist bent. In one previous project she embroidered rap lyrics onto vintage lingerie to illuminate the contradictions between women’s personal and political convictions. Often, Buckman’s process subverts everyday objects with ceremonial importance to illuminate subtle aspects of feminine identity.

Murals, however, were uncharted territory for her, too. “I had hoped that the work I was making in the runup to the election would be less relevant, irrelevant even, today,” Buckman expressed, “but I now find myself even more compelled to make work that aims to inspire critical thought and discussion.”

The “We Hold These Truths To Be Self-Evident” mural will be on view on New York Live Arts’ theater lobby’s Ford Foundation Wall. The title is pulled from Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s 1848 Declaration of Sentiments, when the first-wave feminist referenced the Declaration of Independence clause before amending the original statement to “that all men and women are created equal.”

The title, Frank explained, emphasizes just how recent our nation’s strides towards gender equality are, and similarly, how tenuous. “It hasn’t been 100 years since women got the right to vote,” Frank said. “There is a real fragility there, and a gravity to women taking a stand for themselves and their rights.”

“If there is anything this election has shown us [it's that] the things we take for granted can be wiped out.”
Natalie Frank

Although Frank and Buckman are still in the early stages of the project ― namely, raising funds on Kickstarter ― they have a vision of how the final piece will look. They imagine the quotations flowing around and through the image of a reclining woman.

“We hope the result will be powerful, upsetting, and also inspiring,” Buckman said. “It’s important to us that the woman’s body obscures the text. Her very being irradiates some the letters ... she’s on top, she’s in power. We can and must get through this.”

Clearly inspired by the results of this month’s election, the mural represents two artists reaching outside their comfort zones to protect the rights of those endangered by Trump’s impending administration. “I am terrified,” said Frank.

It’s a strange and confusing moment for many Americans, and art can feel at moments futile and others more necessary than ever. Yet Frank and Buckman are determined to channel the feelings of anger, sadness and uncertainty into creation. 

“It’s hard,” Frank said. “It’s something I’m thinking about every day. I feel hurt and terrified and am tying to use that in a productive way. You try to do something with the tools you have. I’ve always painted about women, but my work is becoming much more pointed.”

In a political moment categorized by fear and precariousness, Frank and Buckman are boldly rejecting the normalization of misogynist language making its way into the White House. As women, they attest, the future of our rights and our bodies are in jeopardy. “We Hold These Truths To Be Self-Evident” communicates the weight of words and, perhaps even more so, the necessity of action.

As Buckman put it: “We all have a responsibility to act now.”

Frank and Buckman are currently aiming to meet their $7,500 goal by Jan. 2, 2017. Visit their Kickstarter page to learn more and donate. 

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Demanding apologies from polite dissenters, floating loss of citizenship as punishment for flag-burning: President-elect Donald Trump has given supporters of the First Amendment more than enough reason to squirm in the weeks since his victory. 

PEN America, a literary and human rights organization, decided to respond by taking a public stand in defense of free expression. On Wednesday, the organization unveiled a pledge to defend the First Amendment that is cosponsored by Daily Kos, The Nation, People for the American Way and a number of progressive entities. 

The pledge, which has been signed by Philip Roth, Salman Rushdie, Nicole Krauss and all living past U.S. poets laureate, calls out Trump’s pattern of threatening speech toward members of the media and disenfranchised groups since his presidential campaign commenced.

“Of specific concern were his threats and insults directed toward journalists, arbitrary limitations on media access and comments in support of potential legal reforms that would weaken First Amendment protections,” the statement reads. “The United States is recognized globally for having the broadest and most powerful protections for free speech in the world. But those protections are now under attack.”

During his campaign, Trump notably suggested that he’d “open up” libel laws if he were to be elected, enabling him to sue publications that published unflattering stories about him. And while many news outlets dismissed the proposition as unlikely, it seems possible. He also notoriously blackballed media outlets that covered him critically, refusing them credentials for his campaign events.

In response to these actions, PEN America and its partners are soliciting reader signatures as well, asking the public to “[d]efend the vital role and the rights of a free press in a democracy,” “reject the bigotry and hate that are creating a widespread and alarming chilling effect on freedom of expression for people of color, Muslims, Jews, the disabled, immigrants, LGBTQ, and women,” and otherwise show support for freedom of speech, assembly, religion and expression.

Read the full pledge here.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Emily Ratajkowski is not happy with Jonathan Leder.

The model/actress sent out a flurry of tweets on Wednesday to criticize the recent publication of a series of photographs taken of her in May 2012. The pictures were taken by photographer Jonathan Leder.

Leder’s book, Leder/Ratajkowski, released this week, includes photos that Ratajkowski claims were strictly to be used in an artful magazine shoot. There are 71 “racy” pictures in the collection, several of which are nude.

Ratajkowski says the book is “a violation” and that Leder never got the OK to publish these images from her. She added on Twitter that women should be able to choose when and how they want to “share their sexuality and bodies.” 

Leder has not responded to Ratajkowski's accusations.

We couldn’t agree more, Em.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

“There is stuff happening out there and no one is doing anything about it,” sorority-girl-turned-masked-vigilante Jules says during the premiere episode of MTV’s “Sweet/Vicious.” “People are just getting away with awful things. I’m trying to make some of that right.”  

Oh that we could make so many awful things right in 2016. On the precipice of America’s first grab-’em-by-the-pussy president, there’s a whole lot to be righteously angry about. Enter “Sweet/Vicious,” MTV’s new (and shockingly timely) comedy-drama. The show, created by 28-year-old Jennifer Kaytin Robinson, explores what would happen if two ballsy college students ― sorority darling Jules and stoner tech whiz Ophelia ― decided to take on campus sexual assault, one abuser at time.

In the age of Donald Trump, “Sweet/Vicious” plays like an extended, satisfying revenge fantasy for women who feel increasingly unsafe and unheard in their own country.

Jules, who is herself a survivor of rape, has become a masked, ass-kicking vigilante before the show even begins. (The opening scene finds her beating the crap out of a male college student who assaulted a girl named Beth. “Please, please no,” he whimpers as a masked Jules punches him in the face. “I’m sorry, I thought no meant yes,” she responds.) Ophelia, a directionless but wealthy and brilliant weed dealer, stumbles into Jules’ punishing path during the first episode. Through a series of unfortunate circumstances, and one brilliant rendition of “Defying Gravity,” the women are thrown together, eventually deciding to combine forces on a shared mission. 

Robinson told The Huffington Post that she conceived of “vigilante-esque female characters” before she decided exactly what they would be fighting, but the epidemic of campus sexual assault felt like a meaningful fit. According to the CDC, nearly 1 in 5 women report experiencing rape in their lifetimes, and 19 percent of undergraduate college women say they have experienced “attempted or completed sexual assault” during their college years.

Once Robinson decided that “Sweet/Vicious” would be centered around sexual assault, she wanted to make sure that the show was made first and foremost for survivors. She worked with organizations like End Campus Rape and RAINN when crafting the first season of the show, and continues to speak with women and men who have been impacted by sexual violence through social media. MTV and RAINN even teamed up for a “Sweet/Vicious” viewing party contest, meant to raise funds for the anti-sexual violence organization.

“I made this show because I wanted women ― survivors of any kind of trauma ― to feel like they belonged,” Robinson told HuffPost. “And then as we started to research and I started to speak with survivors, it became even more important to me to make the show for the survivor, and make sure that they felt heard and did not feel exploited.”

“Sweet/Vicious” is fun and daring and satisfying to watch. It uses a tamer version of Quentin Tarantino-style violence to explore the lasting traces of trauma that sexual assault leaves on those who experience it. I watched the first few episodes of the season before the presidential election took place, and then again after Donald Trump, a man who has been publicly accused of sexually assaulting more than a dozen women, became the president-elect. The show felt different the second time around ― more cathartic, more necessary, more of the moment.

The show effectively toes the line between using violence as a storytelling tool to explore deeper themes of trauma, and appearing to endorse it as a real-world solution. “We want [Jules and Ophelia’s world] to feel larger than life so that it doesn’t feel like we’re saying, ‘Hey get out there and kick a rapist’s ass,’” said Robinson. “You can’t do that. That’s not how the real world works.”

It’s not how the real world works, but just like any superhero story, it’s pretty damn satisfying to watch Jules and Ophelia hunt down the “bad guys” ― in this case, those who commit assault and perpetuate rape culture ― and beat the ever-loving crap out of them. It’s a revenge fantasy ― one that is complicated as the season progresses ― but a fantasy nonetheless. 

We are living in a moment of collective trauma, set off by a gaslighting bully who will soon be the most powerful man in the world. Large numbers of American women are grappling with the psychological scars left by the ugliness unleashed during election season. And many of those women are deeply angry. As New York Magazine’s Rebecca Traister wrote in the wake of the election: “Tears, for women, only sometimes express sadness and vulnerability. Just as often, they signal rage.”

“Sweet/Vicious” offers one small entertaining funnel for that righteous rage. And Robinson hopes that as more people see the show, they will be inspired to become their own real-world versions of Jules and Ophelia.

“The biggest thing that I hope people take away is that you have to fight injustice and you have to stand up,” said Robinson. “And I’m not saying kick someone’s ass. When you see something happening, you have to speak up and you have to become part of the movement. In the wake of this election, I hope this show gets people riled up to the point where they want to enact change.”

Need help? Visit RAINN’s National Sexual Assault Online Hotline or the National Sexual Violence Resource Center’s website.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

For the unapologetically proud Latina, the right gear can go a long way. 

Fearless mujeres not only want to shut down the patriarchy, they also hold their Latina idols near and dear to their hearts. From “Fuck Macho Bullshit Forever” pins to Frida Kahlo-inspired accessories, here’s a gift guide for your favorite bruja, chingona and cabrona. 

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Fine, it’s not a real koala and porcupine. It’s an exclusive clip from the charming new animated movie “Sing.” But it’s just as delightful, because it still involves animals belting out Carly Rae Jepsen, and because Matthew McConaughey plays the cheerful koala and Scarlett Johansson plays the punk-rock porcupine. Watch it below. 

“Sing,” which chronicles said koala’s efforts to save his theater from closing by hosting a talent show, opens in theaters Dec. 21.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Because the movie’s chapters flow in every direction, it’s hard to isolate any scene from “Jackie.” In Pablo Larraín’s remarkable film, Jackie Kennedy’s performative public image is juxtaposed with the unknowability of her private persona.

This clip, exclusive to The Huffington Post, showcases that duality. “I love crowds,” she tells John F. Kennedy before deplaning in the famous pink suit and pillbox hat she donned on the day of his 1963 assassination. Seconds later, as Jackie adjusts to the clamoring mob, we see her aristocratic facade crack, like it’s too overwhelming to bear. Why, exactly? Well, that, my friend, defines the eternal mystery of Jacqueline Kennedy.

Watch the clip below, and marvel at the story that Natalie Portman’s eyes tell. “Jackie” opens in limited release Dec. 2.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Itching to see the new live-action “Beauty and the Beast?” Let this 4-year-old’s take on one of the movie’s classic songs hold you over. 

Claire Ryann Crosby, a 4-year-old known for her covers of songs from Disney films like “Tangled” and “The Little Mermaid,” sang “Beauty and the Beast” for her latest video, wearing a dress suited for a Disney princess.

In the video, Claire’s mom and dad channel Belle and the Beast, and her brother plays Chip. Claire herself makes an adorable Mrs. Potts.

Fingers crossed we’ll get a track from Disney’s hit “Moana” next time.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Hey, #HamFam. As you know, the highly anticipated “Hamilton Mixtape” drops tonight, Dec. 2, at midnight. But, did you also know that some of the musicians on the record are performing the album live today, Dec. 1, at Richard Rodgers Theatre in New York City?

No? Now you do. And you can watch the whole thing here.

Afterward, in honor of the musical homage to “Hamilton: An American Musical,” you can listen to previews of Usher’s and Nas’ contributions to the mixtape, Sia’s song and a version of “Immigrants,” as well as Kelly Clarkson’s rendition of “It’s Quiet Uptown” and The Roots’ “My Shot” featuring Busta Rhymes.

Until then:

Oh, by the way, have you watched Lin-Manuel Miranda drunkenly recite Hamilton’s biography lately? 

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

It almost feels like we’ve been in a deep and dreamless slumber for the past nine weeks, and the “Westworld” season finale airing Sunday may finally pull us out of our loops. It’s been a heckuva first go so far for the HBO series, and co-creators Jonathan Nolan and Lisa Joy have set the finale up to dole out some major revelations. Not to mention that time Evan Rachel Wood, aka Dolores, told us the last two episodes will leave you “with your heart broken and mind blown.”

While we prepare to say goodbye to our new friends, both human and host (at least until Season 2), let’s look back at the biggest reveals from the show.

Warning: Spoilers for “Westworld” Episodes 1-9 ahead.

There are at least a couple of timelines at play.

A major theory that fans have floated around since the introduction of William (Jimmi Simpson) was that the show was following multiple timelines. Many theorized that William and the Man in Black (Ed Harris) are one and the same. Need proof? Notice that the Westworld logos are different in William’s and the Man in Black’s respective scenes, and they’re seen carrying similar knives, to name just two examples. As some have pointed out on Reddit, the Man in Black once claimed that, in a way, he was born in the park. Seems pretty in line with William’s revelation in Episode 7, where he sees how the park had allowed him to “glimpse a life” where he could be “truly alive.”

While we can’t say for sure that the Man in Black is William, we know that they’re not in the park at the same time, based on the hosts’ roles in their scenes. Take, for instance, the host who originally ushered William into Westworld, who is seen in early Arnold-era scenes of the park, and later as one of Wyatt’s crew by the time the Man in Black is in town.

Vulture has a good rundown of the show’s multiple timelines if you still have questions. 

Bernard is a host.

Ford’s (Anthony Hopkins) right-hand man behind the scenes is ... dun dun dun ... one of his own creations! After living under the safe assumption that Bernard (Jeffrey Wright) was a real guy who led Delos’ programming division, wooed Theresa (Sidse Babett Knudsen) in his spare time, and often missed his wife and dead son, Episode 8 blew the lid off that idea.

All the tragedy that made Bernard feel “real” was simply Ford’s storytelling. When Bernard questioned why he would knowingly cause such pain, Ford explained that having a sad past to remember and revisit made his creations more realistic. Yeesh.

Episode 9 ends with Ford directing Bernard to shoot himself in the head, but he’s a host, so ... maybe he’ll be back for the finale?

Bernard was made in the image of Arnold.

Not only is Bernard a fancy robot, we learn in Episode 9 that he was also created because Ford missed his buddy and Westworld co-founder, Arnold. (In some ways, Bernard is probably more useful to Ford, considering he’s under Ford’s complete control.) 

We learn early on that Arnold died around 34 years ago in the park — prior to its opening to the public. However, multiple hosts throughout the series are seen “talking” to Arnold, implying that he still has an influence on them.

It appears Arnold’s connection to Dolores is the strongest. Scenes we previously thought were between Bernard and Dolores, where they are facing each other in a clinical-seeming room, are actually depicting Arnold and Dolores (!). Throughout the series, we learn Arnold and Ford had different intentions for the hosts — Arnold, in particular, wanted them to feel human emotions fully and have memories to inform those feelings.

In Episode 4, Bernard/Arnold tells Dolores, “There’s something I’d like you to try. It’s a game. A secret. It’s called the Maze.” He explains that if she can find the center of it, she’ll “be free.” It stands to reason, then, that scenes we see of Dolores’ journeys both with William and by herself are her attempts to follow the Maze, whether she knows it consciously or not.

Hosts “relive” their memories.

We now know that hosts — Dolores, Maeve (Thandie Newton) and now Bernard in particular — don’t experience memory in the same way humans do. While we recall a past time and are able to fuzzily imagine it, hosts feel as though they are actually living it once again. Knowing this, once-jarring cuts to Maeve’s previous narrative as a homesteader, or the quick flashes where Dolores is with William one moment then alone the next, sort of make sense.

Sylvester, the Delos tech who is often at odds with Maeve’s schemes, explained to her that “your mind isn’t like ours. When we remember things, the details are hazy, imperfect, but you recall memories perfectly. You relive them.” This information reinforces the idea of multiple timelines. If Dolores’ flashbacks are crystal-clear, then all of her scenes with William could be only memories.

Dolores killed Arnold.

Throughout the series, we learn that Westworld co-creator Arnold died before the park ever opened to the public. The circumstances of his death, however, were always mysterious.

Dolores’ journey back to the town with the church triggers memories she has of her long-ago meetings with Arnold in the hidden room beneath the landmark. As she sits in the same chair where she once faced her creator, she suddenly has the capacity to “remember,” as Arnold always urged her to do: She was the one to kill him. Whether or not this was intentional on Arnold’s part is still unknown.

Along these same lines, we’re almost certain that Wyatt, the bad guy Teddy (James Marsden) really, really wants to find, is a stand-in for Dolores. It seems Dolores was behind the massacre the show often shows in flashbacks, and that the memory of this was altered for Teddy. 

Maeve is assembling an “army.”

Once Maeve gained sentience, she realized she wanted to GTFO of the park. We last see her recruiting outlaw Hector Escaton (Rodrigo Santoro) as her henchman and having sex with him in a flaming tent — you know, just normal stuff — in order for the two hosts to reach “hell” together.

In previews for the season finale, Maeve makes it down to cold storage (a group of decommissioned hosts who just seem to be waiting for an opportunity to turn into an angry robot horde, TBH), so we can only imagine how far she gets in her plan.

The Man in Black knows Charlotte Hale (the Delos board member).

Until now, Charlotte Hale (Tessa Thompson) has been imposing her will behind the scenes, but we finally see her enter the park in Episode 9. There, she runs into none other than the Man in Black and ... they know each other?! We learn the Man in Black, who is a wealthy philanthropist IRL, is a fellow board member and totally indifferent to helping Charlotte oust Ford. This is his fucking vacation, Charlotte, geez!

Stubbs is ... in trouble.

Is no one checking on the security head (Luke Hemsworth) after he gets captured by Ghost Nation? Is everything in shambles? On that same track, are we sure Elsie (Shannon Woodward) is really super dead at the hands of Bernard, or just, like, pretty dead?

Logan’s situation isn’t looking too good, either. 

We last see the show’s most lovable jerk (Ben Barnes) being held down by William, who just massacred an entire camp of hosts, holding a knife to his throat. “He had it coming!” you might say. But does Logan really deserve to die, even if he did butcher William’s favorite sentient host in a supremely disturbing manner? We’ll have to wait to see what Episode 10 has to tell us.

The season finale of “Westworld” airs Sunday at 9 p.m. ET on HBO.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

When you want life to feel like a party ALL the time, glow-in-the-dark hair is the natural choice for unnatural color.

By day, this ‘do from stylist Guy Tang is a hot neon pink color that lights up the street. And under a black light, it becomes a mane of fire:

Glow-in-the-dark hair has been trending for a while now, but this latest version ― dubbed “Phoenix Neon Glowing Hair” in a recent YouTube video from the California-based Tang ― is one of the most dazzling we’ve seen.

To get the effect, Tang first bleached the hair and then applied neon semi-permanent dye, as described in his video. 

Neon hair dyes ― even the super-simple DIY kind ― really only show up properly on very light and/or bleached hair, so it’s smartest to go to a salon for the glow-in-the-dark look. If you want to give it a go at home, BuzzFeed recommends trying a semi-permanent rinse or temporary glow-in-the dark gel. 

You glow, girl.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

It’s practically every movie lover’s dream to rewatch their favorite films on the silver screen.

From “Friday” and “Waiting To Exhale,” these movies are cherished because they capture the black narrative through humor, action and effective storytelling.

Now, a new venture called SouledOut Cinema is giving audiences a different way to experience films from the 1980s, 90s and 00s by bringing them back to the big screen.  

The initiative aims to collaborate with movie theaters ― both big and small ― in cities across the country to show three to eight screenings of various black films over the course of any given weekend. Local black restaurants will also be involved to help replace expected movie theater eats with foods like jerk wings, mac and cheese, pound cake, and more. The goal, according to founder Mark Luckie, is to “bring community together around something everybody loves,” he told The Huffington Post, which is a media partner of the initiative.  

Luckie, an Atlanta-based media professional who previously held management positions at Twitter and Reddit, said he had the idea for SouledOut Cinema after a trip to California with his friend in October. 

“I was in Palo Alto, one of the whitest places in California, and there we were, two black men walking down the street feeling very aware of our blackness,” Luckie said. “We then walked past this theater showing [old] black-and-white movies and I thought, ‘Hey why don’t they show black movies?’”

Shortly after the trip, Luckie resigned from his role at Reddit and returned to Atlanta to help launch SouledOut Cinema. The first event will be held in the city between Dec. 16 - Dec. 18, where films like “Coming To America,” “Waiting To Exhale” and “Friday” will be shown across multiple screenings throughout the weekend. The team so far has a list of 45 films that can be shown during one of these weekends, and they had criteria to help narrow down their selections. 

“No slave movies, no maid movies, no civil rights movies and no blaxploitation movies,” he said. “We want to see movies that are more accurate reflections. We want to see something that’s reaffirming for the community rather than this twisted, funhouse mirror version of black life.” 

In the coming months, SouledOut Cinema will be traveling everywhere from to Baltimore to Oakland, New Orleans to Philadelphia. The tour, which will release names for the films when the tickets go on sale at each site and plans to have a more permanent presence in some cities, promises to provide audiences with an “experience you won’t find anywhere else.” 

“It’s all about the community experience and being in the room with people who love the film as much as you do,” Luckie said. “Everyone loves these movies, it’s just a much better and much more rewarding experience.”  

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.