#i need clark in ways concerning to feminism

[sylustration]

I genuinely em in love with this series wtf I love them so so much

[americangirlstar]

Now that both Courtney books are out and I’ve read and processed them both, I do want to say that I think they’re the least well-written of any of the AG books, but not through any fault of their own- let me explain.

(Note that for this discussion I’m ignoring the Doylist criticisms- Courtney and 3/4 of her friend group being white again, the lack of gay discussion in-text in regards to the HIV crisis, etc. These are valid complaints and concerns, but not what we’re talking about right now.)

The Problem with the Current Book Length

I think the main problem with Courtney stems from the fact her books are so short. American Girl has literally been doing the stupidest things in regards to their books lately, almost as if they’re trying to sabotage them on purpose. First they remove illustrations in 2015- when their target audience is about nine years old. I don’t know about you, but when I was six and getting into American Girl, the illustrations were the highlight for me. Not because I had no attention span and loved pretty pictures, but because it showed me firstly what the girl’s life was like, whether it be 1760s wilderness or 2001 Chicago. It was like stepping into their world, really helping you get into their heads, which was basically what the dolls were supposed to do, to let you know that girls like you exist throughout time and space.

As well as that, the illustrations were free advertisement. I can’t tell you how excited me and my sisters were as children to go to the American Girl place and look at the doll displays, shouting that that’s the dress Felicity wears to the ball! or look, Josefina’s goat looks exactly like the book! AG cut that from 2015 to 2020, as if they were trying to appeal to an older audience- while at the same time changing all the doll outfits, accessories and marketing to appeal to a younger demographic.

Now, this isn’t about the illustrations, as Courtney got those- it’s about what they did to the historical characters after the Illustration Outrage™ happened. See, they’d condensed the historical six-book format into two books- not necessarily a bad idea, parents would be more likely to buy two books for their kid than consider buying six. However, they then claimed that if they put illustrations back, they would have to abridge the books- literally my nightmare.

First of all, American Girl, we know for a fact you can fit all six books plus illustrations into ONE VOLUME, let alone two. You’re just being cowards here and trying to nerf your own stories for... some reason.

So that meant a lot of important things got cut- Rebecca’s Chanukah story, Melody’s cousin’s house search, Maryellen’s Christmas adventure... all things important to the girls’ histories and character.

The Problem with Courtney’s Writing

Now, Courtney was the first doll to be released after the abridging began, meaning her books were released, in their entirety, just as short as the abridged stories. So it basically means she gets four books while the others get six- and unlike the others, Courtney doesn’t even have mysteries or short stories to pad out. (And honestly, looking at her book’s amount of content, I’d even argue that she basically got two while everyone else got six, but I digress.)

The problem with her books isn’t that they have an author writing them poorly (I really feel like her author was doing the best with what limited time she had), but in how cramped American Girl made them. Because, well, Courtney has to deal with a lot in such a short amount of words.

Let’s compare her to Julie, for instance- Julie pretty much has a new 70s thing every book. In order: feminism, rising divorce rates, San Francisco’s Chinese culture, environmentalism, the country’s bicentennial, anti-bullying and deaf acceptance. And adding to this, we also have her own personal journies through her parents’ divorce and move, her basketball team, her friendship with Ivy (and later Joy), overcoming her fear of horses, student council, detention... It’s a lot, and yet her books don’t feel rushed or forced at all. It’s just a year in the life of a girl going through a lot of new and sudden events, and how she grows and changes throughout them. She may not be as deep a character as Addy or Kirsten, but not every girl goes through the trials and tribulations they do, and it’s a good series overall.

Courtney, meanwhile, does feel rushed and forced, because of the short timespan. Instead of fitting everything into a six-book format- or even at two-book format that is the same length and content as the six-book- everything has to be fit into two short books.   Everything Courtney has to cover includes the topics of divorce and stepfamilies, feminist and technological advancement, the Challenger explosion, the HIV crisis, Hands Across America, and the founding of Pleasant Company. And in Courtney’s own journey, she has to cover her learning to stand up for herself, her relationship with her stepsister and Tina’s own character development, her mother running for mayor and how that affects her, how much she misses her Dad after he moves, her friendship with Sarah (note on that later), her basically getting hate-crimed after standing up for her friend... that’s a LOT of stuff, and I didn’t even include the non-AG 80s product placement they shove into her collection.

But without the longer format, everything is pushed together to its detriment. Tina’s development and Maureen’s mayoral candidacy are two plotlines that are literally dropped and almost completely ignored in the second book. The Challenger and HIV issues were handled decently, but the Challenger only lasted a few short chapters, and the HIV topic was not as informative as it could be, leaving out several things like Reagan’s refusal to treat it for so long, and its effect on the gay community. Honestly, the HIV scare was more shifted to focus on the mob mentality of a new and scary disease- which, while needed right now, also ignores many of the bigotry-related reasons it became an epidemic. Pleasant Company’s inclusion feels forced in, and I think was the only resolution she had to her Dad plotline?

And don’t get me started on the Sarah plotline- every Girl of the Year since Kanani- sans Isabelle and Luci- has had the story of “oh no I’ve been ignoring my friend and now they’re mad at me :(” and it’s SO old. Seriously, I counted the contemporary dolls that have had that storyline, and it’s thirteen*. Thirteen times we’ve covered this issue- almost all of it in quick succession- and now we have to deal with it in a historical character book while much more important things are going on! Yes, it sucks when a friend ditches you while you’re being attacked and bullied for something you’re standing up for, but once again, with how much is happening in such a short book, it just feels like a forced-in plotline that we’ve seen a billion times, and with their falling-out happening mainly due to the attention Courtney was given Isaac, it serves to make Sarah seem closed-minded at best and bigoted at worst- it’s clarified that she’s not, she’s just scared and upset with Courtney, but when you put those events so close together, it leads the reader to lump them together and get the impression that, you know, Sarah is a worse person than she is.

*Full count: Nicki (book 2), Chrissa (book 2), Kanani (2), McKenna (1 iirc?), Saige (both books), Grace (2), Lea (3), Gabriela (1 and 3), Tenney (2), Z (1), Blaire (1), Joss (1) and Kira (1).

It’s a bit weird, too, that Courtney’s... what’s the word? Vibe? with her how her story is written and marketed Is closer to the Contemporaries than the Historicals. Am I the only one feeling this? My best explanation for it is that the author, Kellen Hertz, had only written contemporary books for American Girl before- the third Lea Clark book and all four Tenney Grant books, both of which contained the Friendship Issues™ plot. I’m not at all saying she’s a bad author- I honestly love the way the Tenney books are written- and I’m not saying she couldn’t write a historical book, but it’s clear American Girl didn’t ask her to change up her style or content from what she’d done for them before, as well as giving her way too much to cover in such short books.

Conclusion

Honestly, this conclusion should be obvious- American Girl needs to expand their books again. Whether they simply allow the books to be unabridged, or go back to the six-book format, Courtney's books are too cramped to tell an effective story, let alone the poor abridged girls.

The other girls were given six-book length, so if they went back to that length or format, Courtney would have to be rewritten, at least a little- and that’s okay! There’s a lot of things that could use expansion or connection, such as her Summer trip with her Dad that was given basically one sentence in the text. Her growth with her stepfamily could be acknowledged- and honestly? I think that if these books were expanded, her mother’s mayoral arc should either continue through the books, or Maureen should become mayor before the book 2 arc. I’ve mentioned this before, but having Maureen as mayor (or even still a candidate) would put a lot of pressure on Courtney to be perfect so that nobody can say “look at how awful this woman is for doing politics instead of raising her family right”- which means that when the Isaac stuff happens, it has even more stakes for Courtney and her family. Does her Mom still support her with her own reputation on the line, and what does that say about Maureen’s character, how does it affect Courtney and the D’Amicos... that’s all fascinating stuff that was completely missed out on.

And if she was turned into a six-book format- honestly, here’s how I’d do it, just off the top of my head. It would involve a bit of event shuffling, but honestly I think it would work!

Meet Courtney - pretty much the setup for everything happening, her starting to get her Crystal Starshooter plans and her mom’s campaign beginning.

Courtney Learns a Lesson - her relationship to Tina, culminating in the Challenger incident.

Courtney’s Surprise - we move the founding of Pleasant Company over here, since Molly’s basically her Christmas Present. We’ll probably need an additional plotline- maybe similar to Julie, she can have a story on spending the holidays in different places.

Happy Birthday Courtney - end of summer, aka meeting Isaac and her trip with her Dad.

Courtney Saves the Day - Beginning of the HIV arc, ending at her presentation to her class.

Changes for Courtney - Continuation of the HIV arc as things get worse for her and Isaac, ending where Friendship Superhero ends.

Is that a perfect sorting? Probably not, I came up with it in ten minutes. But would it give Courtney space to breathe and more time to explore everything happening to her? Probably!

The tl;dr of this is honestly that American Girl are absolute cowards right now, and need to expand their books back. Their abridging is only harming their stories- which, as Courtney herself points out, are the reason girls got into their company in the first place.

[truthbeetoldmedia]

The 100 6x12 "Adjustment Protocol" Review

Hello friends, it’s good to see you all again! I’m happy to be sharing my thoughts with you in this form again. Tonight I’m reviewing episode 6x12 of The 100 “Adjustment Protocol”, written by Kim Shumway and directed by Antonio Negret. I found myself underwhelmed by the season’s lead-in to the finale episode and I’m detailing why below! 

The Good

1. Eliza’s Exceptional Encore

Eliza Taylor has been on it this season. She’s been given extremely meaty scenes and she keeps blowing them out of the water. Clarke has been through so much lately and I am always excited to see what Eliza brings to the material she’s been given. The last few episodes have perhaps been some of the most challenging in her career and she’s been phenomenal in each of them. This episode was particularly tough for her, having to vacillate between Clarke playing Josephine, to Clarke listening to her daughter’s crazed rants and having to hide her tears, to Clarke experiencing the grief of realizing that her mother is dead and having to camouflage it so that her Josephine cover remains intact — and her friends remain alive. I wanted to reach through the screen and hug her when she broke down, because the girl has been through it!

For several seasons it’s been easy to debate about Clarke being a “worthy” hero because her actions don’t often line up with what we’ve been trained to expect of heroes. She is always ready and willing to make the tough choices, to kill whoever needs to be killed to save her people, to reach into the darkest parts of her own soul to make sure that other people don’t have to. This season Clarke has been unwilling to compromise on the promise she made to Monty’s memory. The promise to “do better” is layered in everything that she does and everything that she says. If last season was about the development of Bellamy into a “fully realized” leader, this has been that season for Clarke and she is extraordinary. 

I do find myself concerned about what Abby’s death will mean for Clarke’s determination to be different. It would be so easy to fall back into her old patterns, to lash out and turn her rage to all of the inhabitants of Sanctum (including innocents) instead of just on Russell who rightly deserves it. I’m hoping that she turns to her friends for support in this moment (and in the future) because heaven only knows that she’ll need them to get through this and I believe that perhaps that will be one of the biggest pluses of this season. With all of the crimes her friends laid at her feet this season, after watching Clarke go through so much and consciously continue to “do better”, I hope that we come through this with them realizing how much Clarke has done for everyone, often at her own expense. She’s a hero and she deserves to be treated as such. 

The Bad

1. Men Ruin Everything (Especially Female Television Characters)

In a rather shocking (not!) development, Dr. Abigail Griffin has joined the ranks of deceased characters even as her body continues to walk among the living. It’s been clear to me since Season 4 that Abby and Kane didn’t have long for this world, with Kane’s Season 4 quote, ”The youth will inherit the Earth”, playing a huge part in my thought process. I expected Abby to die that season, due to the problems she was suffering post A.L.I.E., but thanks to Raven’s genius (and Kane’s unwillingness to let her walk out of the bunker) she lived to fight another season. I expected Kane to die in Season 5 after he was attacked mercilessly by the cannibal Vinson and yet he survived those wounds as well. For some, that was a relief but I personally found myself confused and after tonight’s episode (and, in all honesty, their treatment all season) that confusion continues. Instead of being treated with the gravity that main character deaths deserve, both felt unceremonious and rather rushed, but at least Kane received a hero’s death. 

Abby’s story has grated on my nerves from the moment she first appeared in Season 5 with a drug addiction that was second only to her addictive obsession to Kane. Prior to Season 5, Abby’s story involved Kane but did not revolve around him. After that, all bets were off and Abby was only capable of caring about one person and that person was Kane. Everything she did in Season 5 and Season 6 up to and until Kane’s death served one person: Marcus Kane. Abby, a mother, a grandmother and one of only two qualified doctors for all of the people aboard the Eligius ship, became nothing more than a pawn on a romantic chessboard. She, like so many women on this show once they become romantically involved, became nothing more than a support for the man in her life. Even her death, which should be a hugely pivotal moment for this season, as Abby is the only mother of the original 100 we have any connection with, became wrapped up in the irony of what she’d done only three episode prior to save Kane. 

I believe that it also says quite a bit about how this show (which features women quite heavily) understands feminism. It is tragically horrific to kill a woman only a few episodes after killing her male love interest. It sends a message, even if unintentional, that she is only worth keeping around as long as her man is there, too. Abby’s arc could have been finished well in the closing scenes of Season 4, it could even have worked in the mid-season finale of Season 5, but after giving her a drug addiction (which she had not completely conquered), showcasing the absolutely insane lengths she was willing to go to save Kane (which she was not given time to properly “learn” from), it was clear that Abby still had some growth left in her. Unfortunately, it’s a story we’ll never get to see. 

In addition, the lead in to Abby’s death was painfully obvious. They needed to make 6 hosts, they only had 5 bodies. After making herself an obvious threat to Russell, Abby made herself a nightblood (“Like mother, like daughter”, says Jackson in the background for additional foreshadowing) and she’s in just the right age range to be suitable to host a 50-year-old man’s wife — unlike Ash (aka: Echo). She makes up with Raven in a rushed moment and conveniently learns that Clarke isn’t as dead as she thought she was — all in an effort to “finish” her storyline. As she dies, we’re treated to Raven and Jackson sobbing through flashbacks of her loved ones. It’s a death and not one particularly suited to a character of Abby’s standing on the show. More, fans of Paige Turco are likely going to have to prepare to watch “Abby” die once more — just as they did with Kane. It’s been a rough season for fans of Kabby. May we meet again Abby Griffin, you deserved more than you were given. 

2. Forced Female Friendships are not Feminist (Say That 3 Times Fast)

This episode felt like a good reminder that most TV writers do not understand female friendships (yes, even if the writers identify as women themselves). In this episode we are treated to a moment that is still confusing me as I write this (after my second viewing of the episode): Clarke and Echo (and Gaia and Miller) are reunited and in a moment of relief, Echo hugs Clarke after realizing she’s managed to kill Josephine and that ...doesn't make sense. This season has felt like a huge attempt to retcon Clarke and Echo’s relationship into a friendship that does not exist; in fact Echo has been kinder to Clarke than people who have known Clarke for longer (albeit only by a few months) and that doesn’t work for me. 

In the Season 5 two-part finale, Echo literally threatens to kill Clarke, because she is enraged that she left Bellamy to die, in the Season 4 premiere she does the same, in Season 3 she is responsible (in part) for killing many of Clarke’s “people”; and yet, the show, in a strange attempt to portray “friendship” between two women who the audience largely believe to be romantic rivals (because that’s how they are written), would have us ignore all of these previous transgressions, pretend the characters don’t need to have at least a conversation about mending their relationship and have jumped onto the bridge of friendship together. Echo and Clarke honestly don’t even know each other. It’s disingenuous and another example of the horrible ways in which a show that primarily features women treats those women. 

Even worse is the fact that, after repeating Monty’s mantra all season long through many characters (but primarily Clarke), we watched Echo murder Ryker last episode in cold blood. (I have yet to come up with a reason his death makes sense. Yes he was going to wipe Echo, but Miller had him at gunpoint and he’d surrendered. It would have been easy enough to force him into the chair, tie the restraints and gag him — leaving him to be found later by the guards, or in this case Josephine.) What about Echo’s actions this season (in the small amount of screen time she’s been given) equate to “doing better”? We watched people castigate Clarke for killing people to save her people, but no one has anything to say to Echo for killing people to save….herself? It’s baffling that this show continues to have Echo act in ways that are antithetical to those of our confirmed heroes (Bellamy and Clarke) and suffer absolutely no negative pushback from anyone. At what point do we see the consequences of her actions? Especially with the messaging for this season? 

3. Plot Holes Big Enough to Sink a Ship In

As per usual, The 100 once again crafts a season that is perhaps too big for its season length. This problem has been consistent since Season 4 and it’s largely because, after Season 3, the show which once prided itself on the fact that “anyone could die” has now become afraid to kill even the most useless character, if at least one fan likes them. This episode attempted to wrap up several character and plot arcs and as a result it felt overcrowded and rushed. Between bringing the Flame into the plot, the nightblood, making new primes, Emori and Murphy becoming Primes and pretending to be Kaylee and Daniel, Gabriel returning to Sanctum, Russell bombing his people and forcing them to kill each other, Priya’s kidnapping, and Abby’s death it’s just too much for one episode to handle!

If they needed all of these things to happen before the end of the season they should have begun the wrap up sooner (and or gotten rid of two characters in Season 4 and 5 respectively as mentioned earlier) and this is one of the prime reasons I support and advocate for smaller casts. Because every character with even an ounce of screen time is given the “main” treatment, all of their storylines must somehow be wrapped up in the final two episodes and it has historically not worked. In fact, this particular episode’s issues are so glaring largely because this season seriously pared down the amount of time it spent with people who weren’t Bellamy and Clarke (much like Season 2), greatly alleviating the audience’s need to care about so many different characters and it worked! Season 6, up until this episode has been one of the best seasons (my current order being 2, 1, 6, 4, 3, 5) because it felt like they were returning to the heart of the show: Bellamy and Clarke and their relationship to one another (however you might describe that). With this disjointed episode I was again reminded that there are too many characters I don’t have enough time to care about and it sapped the joy out of an otherwise excellent season for me. 

But perhaps that’s my own fault. Perhaps I’m expecting too much from this show in its sixth season and of course I’ll wait to pass final judgement until the finale airs next week. I’ll be writing that review as well! I can’t wait to close out the season with you guys. See you soon!!!

April’s episode rating: 🐝🐝.5

The Season 6 finale of The 100 airs Tuesday, August 6 at 9/8c on the CW.

[sulietsexual]

Could you elaborate why you were dissapointed in season 3 of Stranger Things? I haven't seen it yet but feel free to spoil stuff, already saw tons of gifsets on here.

royalweirdonj said:Thoughts on Stranger Things 3?

Okay, so I have some mixed feelings about this season, so I’ll talk about both the good and the bad and why I was ultimately disappointed with this season (at least in part). So we’ll start with …

What I Liked 

First and foremost, I absolutely loved what they did with El’s character development and characterisation this season. El is a character who hasn’t really had the chance to grow or develop because she’s always so isolated and/or going through so much trauma. In Season 1 she was basically just a traumatised child and in Season 2 Hopper kept her very isolated and her weird sojourn to find her mother and her sister didn’t feel authentic to me. But this season finally gave her the opportunity to start to develop her own sense of self and I loved that, especially the medium through which she did so, ie her friendship with Max.

We’ve all wanted this friendship since Season 2 but I don’t think that any of us realised how glorious it would be. El is a reserved and unsure character (when she’s not being pushed to save everyone) and so she really needed someone like Max in her corner, someone who was loud and assertive, who would stand up for her when she couldn’t stand up for herself and who could show her how to be more dominant and make her own boundaries and rules. I loved the shopping montage, particularly the part where Max helped her pick out clothes that felt like her (”Not like Hopper or Mike, but like you.”), as well as their sleepovers, the way they investigated everything together and the bond which formed from them being the only girls in a group of boys who didn’t always understand each other. It was a really sweet and organic friendship and I’m so glad that the Duffers decided to develop it.

And speaking of friendships, I also adored the dynamic between Steve and Robyn, the way the show turned what we all thought would be a romantic relationship on its head and instead turned it into a sweet and snarky friendship between two people who genuinely liked one another. Robyn herself was a great character and her presence on the show greatly improved the overall tone. I loved how smart and quirky and snarky she was and Mia Hawke really made the character feel authentic. And I really loved the subversion of her and Steve’s relationship and her coming out scene. Steve Harrington proved what an absolute cinnamon roll he is with his reaction to her coming out; I loved that his only response was to tell her that she needed better taste in women and I loved that in the Three Months Later sequence they were still besties looking for jobs in the same place so they could stick together. 

Steve Harrington remained the awesome character he’s always been. Loved that his and Dustin’s friendship is still so intact and that they still care about one another so much. Also loved him sneaking the other kids into the movies on a regular basis. And I liked how the series demonstrated that while he isn’t book smart, he’s smart in other ways, such as figuring out where the music on the recording came from or using the vial of green substance to jam the elevator door open. It shows that he knows how to think on his feet and that he pays attention to his surroundings and is street-smart. I love what they’re doing with his character, allowing him to continue to grow into a more kind, smart and compassionate character with every season.

Also, I loved seeing Science Teacher Scott Clarke again! I missed him in Season 2, so seeing his epic reappearance was amazing! Wish he’d been in more than just one episode.

Characters aside (although, I should mention that I love Joyce Beyers more with every season, her “Mom Voicing” the Government was brilliant and I liked that they touched on her grief over Bob’s death) but that aside, the season felt really well-paced. Only having eight episodes meant that the story progressed quickly and there wasn’t a lot of filler, which was good. There was also so much excitement and action going on that it was very easy to binge-watch the whole season. That being said, I feel like the season changed direction mid-way through, which brings me to …

What I Didn’t Like

Following on from the previous paragraph, I feel like Season 3 started as a character-based season and then quickly switched to a plot-driven season (and on an added note, I was kind of annoyed that the plot this season was literally the same as last season ie the Mind Flayer has taken over someone close to one of the party members and they have to close the gate to stop them - again. Also, the subplot with the Russians was kind of lame). 

There was so much characterisation laid down in the first half of the season which was then kind of forgotten about in the second half once the action got underway and then was never resolved. Will spends most of the first three or four episode lamenting his lost childhood and desperately trying to re-connect with his friends. It’s heartbreaking to see how much he craves the days before everything, the days where he felt safe, where his friends were there for him and not concerned with their romantic entanglements. It was actually a really interesting look into Will’s character and how he’s desperately clinging to the old days but once the Mind Flayer comes into play, this is pretty much dropped. Aside from a half-hearted attempt from Lucas to bridge the gap, Will’s disconnect from his friends and the fact that they’re growing up faster than he is and therefore growing apart from him is never addressed again, leaving this particular thread unfinished. 

Hopper’s characterisation and his storyline regarding being a parent to a thirteen-year-old was also left unresolved. Overall, I didn’t love Hopper’s characterisation this season. He seemed overly aggressive and I really didn’t like that he got so drunk when Joyce didn’t turn up for their date. He’s obviously having communication issues with El, and the opportunity to resolve these issues died along with him. His jealousy over any man who even talked to Joyce was irritating and I didn’t like that he essentially threatened a fourteen-year-old kid and seemed pleased with himself when said kid then hurt his daughter (because it meant that he got his way and that’s all that mattered). I understand why he was so alarmed with El and Mike spending so much time together but the fact that this never got resolved in an adult manner irritated me. And his death, well, we’ll talk about that soon because that pissed me off beyond belief.

Billy’s character needed more depth. I did feel a bit sorry for him this season and he definitely felt like a better character than the previous season, but any development he had (including his relationship with Max) happened offscreen, so it was hard to believe that Max would grieve for him so much after everything we saw him do to her in Season 2. Obviously things have gotten better between the two of them and Billy himself is nowhere near as gross as he was (although he’s still a dick) but we never got to see this growth/development, so it was hard to really empathise with his character or feel grief over his passing, even for Max. 

Nancy’s character felt (once again) kind of useless this season and her storyline was (once again) so separate from the main storyline that I really feel that it could have been removed entirely and it wouldn’t have made a lick of difference. Also, I get that we were supposed to feel that she was being treated in a sexist manner by the men at the newspaper but, I mean, she was only an intern. She wasn’t there as a reporter, she was working as a intern and it’s an intern’s job to run menial tasks such as getting coffee, picking up lunch and doing boring tasks like photocopying and filing and the bad treatment she received seemed to be based more off her intern status than her gender. Also, what did she think, that she would become some groundbreaking reporter based off a summer job with zero experience or writing credentials? Lastly, Jonathan barely felt like a character this season, his sole reason to exist seemed to be to prop up Nancy’s storyline and I hated that after Jonathan delivered that epic (and entirely true) speech about how Nancy didn’t understand the lower class and how he needed the job and wasn’t born with the same silver spoon in his mouth that she was, he then turned around and apologised and said that he was wrong (which he totally wasn’t). Yet another example of Nancy treating a boyfriend like crap and getting away with it, but hey, “feminism”!

I also didn’t really like the dynamic they wrote between Joyce and Hop. It was good at first, with him going to her for advice on how to deal with El and Mike. But once she “stood him up” and they developed that weird snarky “banter”, I found myself growing tired of the dynamic. Also, bringing back the creepy conspiracy theorist from Season 2 to tell them they needed to bang (like he did with Nancy and Jonathan) was, again, so annoying. I hate when characters are told that they have feelings for one another, rather than developing naturally. So yeah, never been much of a Jopper shipper and this season made me even less so. Bring back Bob!

Oh, and lastly, Erica Sinclair is the most annoying little snot of a character. I didn’t find her entertaining at all. She was rude, obnoxious and mean, horrible to pretty much every character, took advantage of Scoops tasting policy while acting like an entitled brat and I just honestly could not stand her. I wish they’d left her out of the Steve/Robyn/Dustin dynamic, she was just such an unnecessary addition.

What I Hated

So, characterisation issues and weird bait-and-switches between it and plot aside, there were a couple of aspects to the new season which I truly hated.

First of all, this season was unnecessarily violent. Like, I get that there’s been violence in this show before, but it’s always been stylized violence, usually aimed at bad guys and quite subdued. But this season? Wow. Starting with that horrible imagine spot where Billy envisions bashing Karen Wheeler’s head in, it just never let up. Having grown men savagely beat up teenagers was way more than I needed to see and the violence often seemed really gratuitous and unnecessarily drawn-out. Steve’s torture at the hands of the Russians was really hard to take, especially because it went on for so long. I hated having to watch them punch Robyn in the face. Jonathan’s brutal beat-down from the Flayed Editor of the paper was horrible to watch and, once again, went on for way too long. Also, watching Flayed!Billy literally choke, punch and smack thirteen-year-old El around was horrifying. Also, his taking of Heather (and later on his attempt to take El) was incredibly rape-y, what with him leaning over them while they were incapacitated and telling them “Don’t move/struggle”, “It will be over soon”. Totally uncalled for and incredibly hard to watch. Maybe I’m oversensitive but I honestly don’t think that the show needed to display that level of violence.

The character assassination of Karen Wheeler continued, with her and her creepy middle-aged mom friends sitting poolside to perv on a eighteen-year-old kid. Imagine if the genders were reversed and it was four middle-aged men perving on a young girl? Also, why would she even consider sleeping with a teenage boy? Sigh. Remember when Karen Wheeler was a concerned and caring parent, who was strong enough to yell at government officials when they wouldn’t tell her what was going on and dropped by a grieving friend’s house with food and comfort? At least she and Nancy had that sweet scene in which she was encouraging to her daughter, but the rest of the time she was just useless and didn’t even know where her kids were.

Speaking of which, why did this show separate Joyce and Hop from their kids for so long? And why on earth would Joyce and Hop be willing to be separated from their kids for so long, after everything they went through the previous year? It felt so OOC for them to not even be suspicious that they hadn’t spoken to either of their children for at least three days, just taking the word of other parents that their kids were alright. 

And lastly, the thing which pissed me off the most and actually made both me and my husband instantly switch off from the show and feel like we had just wasted eight hours watching this season, the death of Jim Hopper.

I know, I know, the Stinger maybe hinted that he was still alive. I know we didn’t see a body. I know that there were hints of time travel in future seasons and that Jim Hopper possibly isn’t dead. But you know who doesn’t know this? The characters. And I hate that. I hate that El has now lost her father, less than two years after finally finding one. I hate that she’s now alone, separated from Mike and while, yes, Joyce will take care of her the best she can, it’s never going to be the same. I hate that Joyce now has to suffer through the heartbreak of losing yet another man she had feelings for, less than a year after she lost the first. I hate that she made the decision to move away (even though I understand it) which separated her kids from their relationships and removed El from the one person who still loves her with all his heart. I hate that the season ended on such a downer, with such loss and tragedy and sadness. It really brought down the whole season for me and left me with a horrible, sad and empty feeling and not at all looking forward to more seasons because of all the crap the characters have gone through.

Whew. That got really long. Hope this was coherent! 

[her-culture]

Homework to Do: A Review of Third Wave Values in a Fourth Wave World

Let’s talk about women supporting women, a value that garnered a new level of awareness in the Third Wave of Feminism. Specifically, how this value indefinitely decides the success or failure of the movement that keeps trying to move on without it.

“What is holding feminism back?”  I wonder in the routine way that you read through a bus schedule. A quick google search will resound ubiquitously with “other feminists”. It sounds like a scathing critique by the fabled masochist that wants nothing more than to shit all over feminist values, struggles & lived experiences, but this truth has been bleeding through feminist literature since the Third Wave.

When it comes down to it, we are holding each other back, and therefore ourselves. Feminism cannot accomplish much when it does not come to the table as one cohesive movement with the same goals. Unfortunately, white feminists have a history of thwarting the progress & needs of intersectional feminists. Third Wave feminism sought to understand the “layers” of oppression that coat women of different races, classes, sexualities, etc. and the sum total force that such life-long influences have on the self-esteem, abilities and identity of a woman struggling for equality. The Womanist movement took a slight detour from this thought, actually turning it on its head, by stating that these cultural influences define the way that we understand our own ‘womanness’; the ways we relate to our perceived femininity.

 Intersectional Implications

In lieu of these evolving definitions of what it is to be a woman, and that one woman’s definition very likely does not match her sisters’ definition, it is integral to the cause of feminism that we incorporate the needs of all incarnations of women into the efforts we collectively display. Judit Moschkovich breaks down the implications of this compartmentalized (and therefore weakened) feminist force: “Think of it in terms of men’s and women’s cultures: women live in male systems, know male rules, speak male language when around men, etc. But what do men really know about women?

Only screwed up myths concocted to perpetuate the power imbalance” (“But I Know You American Woman,” 1981)[1] . When this lack of real knowledge is applied amongst women of different cultures, classes or sexualities, the entire movement suffers because of it. If women cannot accept the struggles of their sisters - from trans-women to poverty line to Asian American to black lesbian - as their own, the collective force of feminist action will be continually stunted and unable to accomplish much.

 The Problem with Separationists

Mirtha Quintantales in I Come with No Illusions (1981) laments “What are the implications of separating myself from American women and creating a separate community with women I identify as my counterparts? It means for one thing that I am admitting failure. Failure to adjust, adapt, change, transcend cultural differences. Yet this is not only a personal failure. It is one which I share with millions.” By refusing to relate, by refusing to involve ourselves in the diverse struggles of feminists with backgrounds different to our own, we continue to condemn our chances for progress. Especially in the isolationist culture of America where even those privileged enough to have the resources to examine the unique struggle of her intersectional sisters continually chooses to leave such important work on the back burner, feminism continues to be crippled by the impotent force of exclusionary action. This goes specifically toward middle-class white women who remain largely blind to the nuances of intersectional experiences. Moschkovich iterates “I believe that lack of knowledge about other cultures is one of the bases for cultural oppression…How can one feel guilt about screwing over someone/some country she knows nothing about?”

 Ignorance is Not Bliss

This issue expresses itself (across all races, classes, sexualities and gender entities within the feminist movement) as diversely as there are feminists to act. It comes when women debate who is more oppressed than who. Cheryl Clarke in “Lesbianism: An Act of Resistance” (1981) states blankly “So, all of us would do well to stop fighting each other for our space at the bottom, because there ain’t no more room. We have spent so much time hating ourselves. Time to love ourselves. And for that, … is the final resistance.” It comes when an English-speaking woman subjugates another woman’s concerns for her specific experience of oppression because she speaks a different language. It comes when we minimize the impact that race, class, gender identity and sexuality have on the immediate needs of women. It comes when we continually file down the focus of our cause to, ultimately, what serves immediately ourselves, rather than those in our coalition.

 Call to Action

The first step is accepting the presence of these inbred, stereotyped faux-insights about other cultures, classes and gender or sex identities, and recognizing that the knowledge we think we have about marginalized peoples comes from the twisted lens of media and traditional supremacist values. The next step is seeking out education for ourselves, rather than expecting another marginalized person to do the footwork for us. These necessary actions are true for all feminists that want to elicit some change in the world she must continue to struggle in. Racism, classism and other forms of discrimination are present [though perhaps disproportionately] from all perspectives of the collective movement, and therefore need to be re-examined by all sides. Without compassionate action for each other, we can hardly expect to accomplish anything for the collective.

[loudlytransparenttrash]

This Week Within Our Colleges: Part 17

UC-Berkeley students protested their own exam and demanded a "take-home essay with significant time to prepare" in its place. “Our well-beings are being put on the line because of the emotional, mental, and physical stress that this university is compounding with what is already going on in our everyday lives,” the student protestors cry. They go on to claim that their professor is unqualified to teach because he’s a white man, and after nearly four minutes of non-stop bitching, one student said he just wanted to take his exam, which got him named a “white boy with privilege” by the protestors. Just as the group was leaving, one stayed behind to tell off the rest of the class, “I don’t know why you’re still, like, sitting down. I really don’t understand. Y’all can take your fucking test, but people are dying out there. Y’all can take your test, but this university is protecting white supremacists, and y’all are protecting them too.” 

Stevens Institute of Technology students are demanding that the school completely rename a building named after Republican Greg Gianforte, who paid for the academic center to be built. The school agreed to change its name to highlight Gianforte’s wife and parents although the students want his surname removed from the building completely. The students are hoping to raise $20 million, the same amount donated by Gianforte, to buy out the building and rename it themselves, however, the students have only raised about $1,500.

The University of Wisconsin, Madison students are demanding for a disclaimer to be added on an Abraham Lincoln statue accusing him of genocide. Katrina Morrison, chair of the Associated Students of Madison, said that while she appreciates “Lincoln’s role in creating land-grant institutions,” she supports a plaque on his statue to recognize what she called “his brutality towards indigenous people.” “We want a plaque because we want the university to recognize his part in the massacre and killing of innocent people.” Mariah Skenandore, co-president of an indigenous student organization, likewise supported the measure, saying the university doesn’t “acknowledge the impact that it is having on their students” by not having the plaque in place. 

Seattle University's law school withdrew its sponsorship of a debate over illegal immigration in fear exposing students to “painful” conservative viewpoints. The goal of the debate was to examine and talk about DACA. More than 200 students signed a petition demanding that the school not host the event, calling it “hateful xenophobic and anti-immigrant rhetoric“ and both “harmful and unsafe” for the school’s undocumented students. Following the petition, law school dean Annette Clark announced that the institution would no longer sponsor the debate as part of its “Social Justice” duties. 

University of Oregon students forcefully disrupted a speech by the school’s president as he attempted to outline how the school plans to put a massive $50 million donation to use. He was prevented from coming onto the stage by students shouting chants such as “Nothing about us without us!” and cries of fascism and Nazis. President Michael Schill was instead forced to stay in his office and make a video announcement to the students, where he promised the money would help fund a new Black Cultural Center, which includes tutoring and support staff for black students.   

A University of Nevada-Las Vegas professor told her class that Trump may have played a role in encouraging the mass shooting days earlier. Tess Winkelmann was captured on video telling her students that Trump has only encouraged violence since being president and violence is a consequence to his words. Winkelmann boasts about her early warnings that Trump was going to end up getting people killed, “When he got elected, I told my classes three semesters ago, some of us won’t be affected by this presidency, but others are going to die. Other people will die because of this.” She also accused Trump of white nationalism and “threatening nuclear violence against North Korea.” 

Two Mount Allison University professors wrote an article arguing that white students from Western countries need to take workshops to confront their "white fragility" and “white privilege” before going on study abroad trips. If students fail to critically reflect upon their fragility, the professors warn that they risk perpetuating “harmful outcomes” to these countries and could possibly “overlook and perpetuate racism.” To fight this, they recommend robust “pre-departure programming and preparation” for white students. Though the professors warn that this training may not be enough to fully address students’ white fragility. “The antidote to white fragility is on-going and life-long, and includes sustained engagement, humility, and education,” they conclude.

A Pennsylvania State University-Brandywine professor criticized her students for believing in “whiteness ideology” which includes acknowledging “if I work hard, I can be successful” and that “everyone has an equal opportunity to achieve success.” Angela Putman designed a comprehensive three-day seminar on “white privilege” for her students, and became concerned when she realized most students have been “socialized to believe that we get to where we are through our own individual efforts.” Instead, she claims, our fate is decided by “racism and whiteness functioning in various contexts, the powerful influence of systems and institutions, and the pervasiveness of whiteness ideologies within the United States.” Once students “learn more,” Putman hopes that they will “resist perpetuating and reifying whiteness through their own discourse and interactions,” and learn to fight “manifestations of racism and whiteness within U.S. institutions and systems.”

Members of the Black Student Union at the University of Vermont forced their way in to the president's office this week to present a set of demands. In addition to "mandatory diversity training" for all faculty and frat/sorority members, the students also demand increased funding for non-whites and expulsion of students who commit "hate crimes" such as removing a BLM flag. The ultimatum concludes by demanding the administration renames an on-campus building named after George Perkins, an environmentalist who served in the Abraham Lincoln Administration. “If the University of Vermont is truly ashamed of its disgustingly racist history, then the name of this building needs to be changed.” The group was originally told that University President Tom Sullivan was unavailable, but they took it upon themselves to barge their way in.

A group of professors recently warned college administrators that “diversity educators” risk “burnout and fatigue” from “the emotional weight” of their jobs. Seven diversity educators from a “predominantly white research institutions” were interviewed, and they found that many of the subjects described suffering from “burnout” and “racial battle fatigue” from their microaggression prevention efforts. This burnout is caused by diversity educators’ “consistent exposure to various microaggressions,” noting that microaggressions can be described “as forms of assault and torture.”

UC Riverside student Edith Macias became hysterically outraged when she saw a male student wearing a MAGA hat. She abused him and stole his hat, saying it represents genocide and “freedom of speech is genocide, homeboy.” The butch Mexican goes on to say that stealing his property is no big deal because the student’s ancestors stole land, later calling him a white boy. Liberal students rallied around Macias and defended her actions to take the MAGA hat, which they say represents “a violent white supremacist regime.” They also demand UC administration to “pay for alternate housing accommodations for Macias while simultaneously covering her current housing costs” and “grant Macias amnesty and protection from any student or legal charges.” The students go on to demand for the school to release a statement against “white supremacist violence,” as well as one in support of sanctuary campuses. 

California State University, Long Beach is looking for a new professor to teach classes on “gender variant theories.” The new hire will be asked to develop courses on topics such as queering gender, queer studies, feminist transnationalism, trans feminism, transmigration, and gender variant theories. Notably, the Women’s Studies Department which invents these bizarre courses, also offers a variety of other feminist courses, including one on “the social construction of masculinity” another titled “lesbian histories” and a class on “queer spirit.” 

Swarthmore Indigenous Students Association burned the American flag and issued a set of demands, including the removal of the flag from campus. The demands called on Swarthmore College to “admit and recruit native students” and for the school to create a fund to pay for flights “to and from home” for all students who are unable to afford travel expenses. The demands were made public at one of their flag-burning events. “We burn the American flag not just for ourselves, but for our ancestors who died because of that flag. We burn it for our indigenous siblings across the globe and for all of the people across the globe exploited by the United States and other Western imperialist states. We burn this flag because we want you to know it’s not just you who is angry and fighting against this oppressive apparatus, we are too.” 

A University of Connecticut professor is calling for a “more expansive inclusion of feminism” by colleges to help female students recognize the oppression they face. Cristina Mogro-Wilson surveyed over 100 female students and found that the overwhelming majority of them do not believe that “discrimination and subordination” are issues in women’s lives. The findings were deeply problematic, she contends, because without a sense of their own oppression, female students may be disinclined to protest in order to “create change.” Worrying about the potential of a “post-feminist standpoint among younger women who no longer see discrimination against women as being a salient issue,” Mogro-Wilson calls for even more feminism and intersectionality into the school’s curriculum. It’s really sad to watch old feminists beating a dead horse, desperately trying to keep their paychecks coming in. 

Another feminist professor joined the dead horse flogging, saying more feminism needs to be taught to female students in response to their "waning attention to feminist concerns.” Katherine Cruger from Chatham University says she has noticed students “wary to acknowledge that they could be suffering at the hands of an imperialist, white-supremacist, capitalist patriarchy.” We’ve heard of “race fatigue,” now Cruger cites “feminist fatigue” as a possible reason why female students aren’t bothered by their so-called oppression. Cruger says she was disturbed when one female student said she is “sick to death of feminism.” To combat this dissidence, she encourages students to learn how to better appreciate feminist activism through more extensive teachings of feminism in the classroom, noting that without this activism, “we will be stuck in a heteronormative, racist society that never grows.”

Two Seattle Pacific University professors argue that it is necessary to redefine science in order to combat "white male privilege," which they believe is the primary reason that more men are interested in and excel in STEM fields. According to the pair, professors must work to "disrupt privilege" in their classrooms by de-emphasizing "male-socialized traits such as independence, competition, and individual victories." The professors also assert that science has been used as a tool of racial oppression, complaining about “science disproportionately advantaging white people.” To combat this, they call upon fellow professors, especially those who are white males, to “disrupt privilege” in their classrooms by “recognizing their own privilege” and coming to see themselves as “agents of change who can contribute to the disruption of systems of unfair advantage."

The University of Missouri released a set of guidelines on how to host inclusive events, asking students to consider having “a counselor present” for “potentially triggering” events - their words, not mine. The guidelines lists dozens of questions students should ask themselves during the planning stages, including, “If my event is potentially triggering, do I have a counselor present?” and “do I need to create a ‘safe space’ for this event?” Another series of questions warns students making advertisements for their event to be “conscious of colors and how they can be exclusionary or stereotypical” while considering the language used on advertisements as it “can potentially be biased.” Another set of questions focuses on the “decorations” used at events, which students should assure “aren’t culturally appropriative or misrepresenting to other cultures” by “doing my research on a culture I am attempting to appreciate.”

The president of Albion College says that it is “appropriate” for people of privilege to feel “uncomfortable.” President Mauri Ditzler made the remark during a meeting with a conservative student who was harassed and abused by protestors after he made talking points derived from Ben Shapiro quotes. Ditzler came out in solidarity with the protesters, lecturing the conservative student about how he was “only made to feel uncomfortable for a day,” while “many of those demonstrating feel uncomfortable every day.” He goes on to say that while the violent protestors made him feel uncomfortable himself, this discomfort was actually “an example of his own privilege.” 

A group of protestors shut down a discussion on “civil discussion” (the irony) at the University of California, Los Angeles, forcing the event to be relocated. The video shows one female shouting, “We need to actually organize ourselves to create a political crisis to get this fascist regime from power,” claiming the “country was founded on genocide and slavery” and “was never fucking great.” “We can’t normalize fascism,” she proceeded to scream, leading audience members to stand and raise a fist with her in protest... “Stand up because this is what the good Germans were facing. This is what the people in Nazi Germany were facing,” she declared as another protester joined in, eventually leading the unoriginal chant of “No Trump, no KKK, no fascist USA!” As the auditorium emptied, protesters repeatedly shouted “November 4, it begins. Trump and Pence must go!” referencing Antifa’s planned uprising on this date where they intend to create havoc “day and night” until Trump resigns...

The University of Maryland-Baltimore County Women’s Lacrosse team has been labelled “racist” and “ignorant” after the team’s twitter account liked a tweet by President Trump which he wrote about honoring the American flag which men and women have fought and died for. UMBC’s Black Student Union noticed the Women’s Lacrosse team’s twitter account's grave wrongdoing, telling them, “You’re welcome to come to a meeting and voice your ignorance and blatant disregard for students within your campus let alone your own team. If you are going to be racist please come correct.” The women’s team twitter account was later entirely deleted after other black students jumped on the bandwagon of calling them racists. 

Brown University students voted to end the purchase of feminine hygiene products from the company “Tampon Tribe,” due to cultural appropriation. They claim that the company “affected them really deeply” due to both “the name and some of the branding as well.” One student organizer said she “had concerns about Tampon Tribe’s name over the summer when they first considered using the company,” but pushed on after gaining assurance the company had “Afro-diasporic and indigenous identities” as leaders. Fatal mistake. They soon realized that it was still cultural appropriation to buy these tampons, so they stopped purchasing them immediately. 

A University of Southern California professor argues that condemning protesters who disrupt and shut down conservative speakers can reinforce “white supremacy.” Charles Davis believes because the protesters are disproportionately “students of color” or “students representing other marginalized groups,” any attempt to stop protestors from shutting down these events, it’s actually the protestors who are made to feel unsafe. Davis says these protesters are simply people who “use disruptive tactics to shut down hate speech and engaged in resistance against white supremacy.” Instead of criticizing the protesters, Davis encourages to “spend substantive time listening to their concerns” as they’re justified because “colleges have exacerbated racial issues by allowing the presence of white supremacy on-campus.”

A pair of student groups at Kent State University, including one named WOKE (World Of Kolored Empowerment... I’m not even kidding), staged a protest where they all stood in a circle, and then took a knee. According to the group’s flyer, the students took a knee for “the Dreamers, the brutalized by the authority, the ones who have been under and misrepresented” and “the oppressed who don’t believe that a change will come." One student who attended the demonstration said he felt it was his “duty as someone who has privilege to express my voice," while another had tears streaming down her face as she held a sign to protest against the hurricanes in Puerto Rico.

Another group of students at Cornell University took a knee against white supremacy and whatever else they were displeased with when they woke up. While the kneeling only lasted two minutes, the rally was filled with speeches covering topics of white supremacy, racism, and privilege. “Our society is steeped in white supremacy. Why should we expect Cornell, an enterprise built on stolen land, to be any different?” Professor Russell Rickford said during his speech to the crowd of students. He went on to show his communist ties, saying the school is a white supremacy because it supports “hierarchies of privilege, upon which global capitalism rests.” He later led chants of “free Palestine!” which the student drones eerily repeated collectively. 

Students at Reed College are protesting a required humanities class for freshmen that focuses on texts from the great thinkers of ancient Greece and Rome, saying that “students taking Western Civilization courses is harmful” because “the course in its current iteration draws from predominantly white authors.” Remember this is a course on ancient Greece... The protest group claims the class should be “reformed to represent people of color” in a list of 25 demands, which also includes “anti-oppression workshops, scholarships for black students, paid positions for black students and the hiring of more black faculty.” The protestors stormed the class and overtook the stage, while giving the class a lecture of their own and vowing to hold silent protests during every lecture. The student activists also brought in mental healthcare advocates for students who have reported having “panic attacks” due to the course material.

Two feminists at Columbia University are campaigning for the class presidency by promising free “Lego, bubble-wrap, and Play-Doh” to classmates. “Do you want Legos, Bubble Wrap, and Play-Doh?” asks their campaign flyer, which is posted around campus. “If so, vote for the STEMinists” - the name the feminist duo, Michael and Riya, have given themselves. If elected, the pair hopes to sponsor events focused on women’s empowerment, but they’re also set on showing students that school is fun! “We would do events to destress. For example, we'd create a Lego area and it'll be fun. One of the activities we also plan on doing is giving out free Bubble Wrap.” 

A bulletin board at Kent State University residence hall is urging students to “stop cultural appropriation this Halloween” by eschewing costumes based on other cultures. According to the display, cultural appropriation occurs whenever somebody “adopts aspects of a culture that’s not their own," particularly if the person is part of a "dominant culture," which yes, is just another way to say white people. Towson University announced that is has joined “Ohio University and universities across the country in reminding our community this Halloween that ‘we’re a culture, not a costume.’” DePauw University also publicized the campaign, telling students that “stereotypes hurt.” Similarly, Central Michigan University announced plans to host an October 25 event dedicated to ending stereotypical costumes in a recent Facebook post, encouraging students to “Get involved and take a stance against the appropriation of costumes.” 

A professor at the University of Illinois has become highly concerned that algebra and geometry perpetuate “unearned white privilege” because “terms like Pythagorean theorem and pi” give the impression that math “was largely developed by Greeks and other Europeans.” She also worries that teaching more advanced math can perpetuate discrimination against minorities, especially when they do worse than their white counterparts. “On many levels, mathematics itself operates as whiteness. There are so many minorities who have experienced microaggressions from participating in math classrooms, where people are judged by whether they can reason abstractly,” the professor states. She also wonders why math professors get more research grants than gender and women’s professors.

A teaching assistant at the University of Pennsylvania admitted to intentionally ignoring white male students and will only call on them if she has to during class discussions. “I will always call on black women students first. Other POC get second tier priority. White women come next. And if I have to, white men.” Close your eyes and think of the most stereotypical man-hating, smug feminist with a man’s haircut and you’ve just pictured Stephanie McKellop. She was not happy when the school issued a statement condemning her blatant classroom bias, saying, “I had the cute idea that Penn could defend me against Nazis.” No love, Penn has an obligation to defend its students against sleazeballs like you. 

[sometimesrosy]

Anonymous said:The hair reeks racism but go off with all the hair speculation trying to excuse everything the writers do

All right. You want to talk about the hair, and, in so doing, my supposed white feminism. That’s what we’re talking about here, right? Okay. Let’s talk. 

You know what dreads look like right?

Those are not them.

That’s not what they look like on white people hair. That’s not what they look like on black hair. You can see the twists at the top of the head. And that there’s some sort of oil or gel in them. 

Octavia’s style not a black hair style. Therefore it is not cultural appropriation. Therefore is not racism. It’s ugly, but it’s not racism. 

Gaia has dreads. Has anyone complained about Gaia’s use of dreads? Why would they?

You know what? Nyko had dreads. That is what dreads look like on a white person. I have never heard anyone get upset about Nyko’s dreads. I don’t know why. For some reason, his actual dreads are not offensive or racist? 

This hair on Octavia or Clarke or Murphy?

Not.

Dreads.

Dreads don’t fall out when you step away from the hair stylist. Clarke’s hair melted away as soon as she left Polis. Dreadlocks don’t do that, do they? They are “locked” in place. An act of the natural texture of hair in some people, or the act of extreme manipulation in others. I don’t know what they do to make white hair dread up but it doesn’t look pleasant.

Clarke had a couple of dreads after she was out in the woods for 3 months that lasted all season. Under her hair. I get those mats in winter but I don’t turn them into dread locks, I rip them out with a comb. I can’t speak to what they did in Polis, but if you want to talk about dreads on Clarke, those were dreads. She also had braids and beads. But the twisty thing on top?

NOT. DREADS.

Just. Compare them. Look at pictures of the two hair styles. They’re really not the same. I don’t know why people keep saying they are.

I’ve been theorizing about WHY the show chose that ugly hairstyle. Sorry, that’s what I do. You’re making things up so you can call the writers racist, because you think that makes you more morally pure than other people and it gives you a sense of purpose and righteousness and power. 

But you should make sure that you get your facts straight before you accuse people of being racists, and check your own motivation, not just because it’s cruel, bullying, and not true, but because it TRIVIALIZES racism.

 If you call EVERYTHING that you don’t like racist, for whatever reasons, it becomes very easy to dismiss, because it is clearly inaccurate. And then when people do things that are racist and toxic and meant to harm people or even just unconsciously oppressive accidentally (which doesn’t make it better) no one will believe you when you call it racist. They’ll just think it’s typical over sensitive SJW nonsense and completely disregard you. They already don’t believe us. They already think our reasons for feeling oppressed are made up. You’re reinforcing their belief that all racism is fake or even deserved. 

You’re also agreeing with their position that all races should be separate and pure and not interact and not communicate and not share, so any whiff of similarity to black culture in a fictional tv show is seen, by you, as offensive. As if imaginary survivors of an imaginary apocalypse will not have integrated various cultural elements into their new society. Because races are meant to be pure and separate. Just like the racists want. So, good job internalizing the messages of the racists and deciding that multiculturalism and sharing cultures is evil. I, being mixed race and multicultural, do not think it is racist at all. Mainly because that very belief is racist against me and all mixed race and multicultural people.  

Calling someone a racist is not a game. 

I do not think this show is racist. I just don’t. I am entitled to my opinion, which is not ignorant, as I’ve been studying racism and the media since I was a child from Harlem and The Bronx. And it’s also not a white opinion, because I am not white. You don’t have to like my opinion. You don’t have to agree with my opinion. But my opinion is valid. 

When I think a show is racist. I STOP WATCHING. Because racism offends me. You can’t force me to be offended by something that I don’t find offensive. I suggest you quit The 100, because you think it’s racist and the producers are offensive. You should not support that. 

 I don’t agree that The 100 is racist, so I’m going to keep enjoying it and keep on making my theories about what is going on. However, I don’t enjoy being told I’m not allowed to have theories that don’t agree with yours. I don’t enjoy the serious implication that I am a racist because I don’t follow your dogma. I don’t enjoy the way your part of the fandom keeps trying to erase my POC perspective because you think only one POC opinion is allowed. I don’t enjoy the racism directed at mixed race and multicultural people by supposed allies and POC themselves. And I don’t enjoy how lately, some people seem to think it’s righteous to talk over all latinx and disabled fans and condescendingly tell us our representation is racist, sadly, I’m worried, because I personally took a stand for finding Raven’s storyline inspiring. I am concerned that you’re taking out your beef with me on other minorities. This is a problem. 

I get that you think I have some sort of audacity to claim that I am POC and even more audacity to claim that my POC perspective deserves to be voiced. But since I never needed your permission to exist and never asked your permission to speak, I don’t care. I don’t need your validation or approval to have my own thoughts. I never did, and I think that’s why you are getting upset. I’m not allowed independent thought or a voice at all. You have not only not gotten your facts straight about the hairstyle on the show, you have not gotten your facts straight about who I am.

Minority voices do not need permission to speak. In fact, one of the problems is that minority voices are consistently REFUSED permission to speak. That is why we don’t need YOURS. 

I’m not playing your fandom wars because you want attention and drama. 

Nice hearing from you. Thanks for letting me get this off my chest. 

You’re blocked.

[dweemeister]

NOTE: The following contains some spoilers. 

Justice League (2017)

Under the leadership of Zack Snyder, the DC Extended Universe (DCEU) has begun with embarrassing efforts including Man of Steel (2013), Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016), and Suicide Squad (2016). The outlook at Warner Bros. was grim, facing diminishing box office returns and vicious critical reviews. This summer, it took Wonder Woman to provide any hope that the DCEU was on an upward trajectory. In comes Justice League, a film that marks a step forward for Warner Bros.’ most important franchise, but is troubled by writing its way out of the holes dug by Snyder in Man of Steel and especially Batman v Superman. With Zack Snyder’s Justice League (alongside expensive reshoots by Joss Whedon, credited as co-writer with Chris Terrio), the DCEU remains in critical condition. But unlike the recent philosophical shallowness of the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s (MCU) militancy, the DCEU – in Wonder Woman and Justice League – is making an honest attempt at a superheroing dialectic.

Shortly after Superman’s death in Batman v Superman, Steppenwolf (Ciarán Hinds; the character is an alien general from Apokolips who serves Darkseid) has landed on Earth to retrieve three Mother Boxes and harness the boxes’ aggregate powers to commence Earth’s destruction. No one knows the exact capabilities, purposes, or origins of the Mother Boxes, but Amazonian Queen Hippolyta (Connie Nielsen) warns Diana Prince (Gal Gadot; Wonder Woman) of Steppenwolf’s arrival. Diana joins forces with Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck; Batman) and, together, recruit Arthur Curry (Jason Momoa; Aquaman), Barry Allen (Ezra Miller; The Flash), and Victor Stone (Ray Fisher; Cyborg). Steppenwolf and his army of Parademons are making quick work of finding the boxes, and – this should come as no surprise to anyone paying attention to the DCEU – our superheroes exhume and reanimate Clark Kent (Henry Cavill; Superman) in preparation for the final showdown.

The supporting cast is unwieldy – as in any superhero team movies – but the prominent members include: Bruce’s butler Alfred Pennyworth (Jeremy Irons); Clark’s mother, Martha Kent (Diane Lane); Clark’s love interest but, most importantly, Pulitzer-Prize winning journalist for the Daily Planet Lois Lane (Amy Adams); and Gotham City Police Commissioner James Gordon (J.K. Simmons).

Before delving into the heart of this write-up, note that Zack Snyder departed the project after a sudden family emergency. Joss Whedon (who directed the first two Avengers movies) replaced Snyder, re-wrote scenes, and filmed reshoots. The stylistic differences between the two directors clash throughout Justice League – Snyder has always relied on a desaturated brown- and black-heavy color palette, foreboding self-importance, and an attitude toward life that is a cross between an emotionally bankrupt nihilist and that edgy fellow from your Intro to Philosophy class trying to be “deep”, but failing; Whedon established the MCU’s quip-heavy dialogue in favor of slowing down the action and showing us where a superhero’s humanity comes from, oftentimes interrupting thoughtful moments and conversations like a loud frat boy with a tenuous command of the subject being talked about (the frat boy might actually be “deep”, but he has trouble expressing himself).

I profess to appreciate Whedon’s writing only a little more than Snyder’s. Self-important superhero movies need to earn their somberness – see Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy – and humanizing those with superpowers is something that post-Spider-Man 2 (2004) superhero movies have all but forgotten to do. So the Whedon-esque comedic dialogue is appreciated, if occasionally misplaced in the thick of a violent scene. In other times, Whedon’s dialogue is entirely inappropriate and will unintentionally have the audience burst out in disbelieving guffaws. Let us take the scene where Superman returns with Lois Lane to Smallville.

Lois’ first line is to tell Clark that he smells good.

“Didn’t I smell good before?” he asks.

That is the first thing she says in their first private moment together? And second, wouldn’t being buried six feet under make you smell like earthworms? I guess Kryptonian pheromones are pretty resilient even in death! Soon after, Lois asks Clark what was it like being dead.

“Itchy,” he says.

Itchy? Is the Kryptonian afterlife filled with Kryptonian fleas (bad news for Krypto the Superdog if that’s the case)? To pull back before I pick and choose dozens of individual lines of dialogue for ridicule, Whedon’s comedic tendencies – not for the first time – destroy any sense of intimacy between friends, lovers, and family. A Whedon-written subplot about a Russian family fleeing the final battle sequence is manufactured and manipulative, rather than horrifying or inspiring.

For Snyder (and Terrio, who worked with both Snyder and Whedon and whose contributions are less clear), his writing belies little interest in adding dimensions to Steppenwolf. The worst of Snyder appears immediately after Superman is resurrected as Batman, Wonder Woman, Cyborg, and The Flash must combat the awoken Man of Steel in a battle that does not serve anybody’s characterization or the plot’s progression. It is a superficial battle fulfilling Snyder’s dependency on unnecessary violence to keep interest going.

Yet Snyder is also responsible for the film’s most inspiring moment. Unfortunately, that comes in the opening minutes as the film introduces Wonder Woman. She is seen defending civilians from terrorists threatening to obliterate a London bank. From the sequential progression of the moment – despite being deprived of too much context – and the impressive visual effects, it builds off Patty Jenkins and Allan Heinberg’s characterization of Wonder Woman earlier this year. And though the final line of that introductory scene smacks of cheesiness (”Who are you?”; “A believer.” Is Diana a Monkees fan?), it retains what was essential of Jenkins’ interpretation of Wonder Woman: that Diana has always been motivated not by personal animus, but a genuine, learned belief in humanity’s characteristic and fragile goodness. It is a brief moment, this. Yet in that snippet, Zack Snyder – whether he internalized these lessons or not – provides a moment worthy of cheers and, yes, tears.

The balance of screentime between all six founding members of the DCEU’s Justice League (spare a thought for fans of omitted, original founding members Green Lantern and Martian Manhunter) is equal enough, although Aquaman does not truly factor until the final third of the film. For Aquaman, The Flash, and Cyborg, Justice League might feel like an extended trailer for their more interesting standalone movies. Regarding the film’s treatment of Wonder Woman, there are mixed results after that spectacular introduction. One-liners and comments about Wonder Woman’s attractiveness (Flash, Aquaman, and Alfred in particular) are unwelcome, undermining the professionalism seen in the Cartoon Network animated series Justice League / Justice League Unlimited (2001-2006) and even Hanna Barbera’s long-running Super Friends (1973-1986). The angles in which Wonder Woman is shot also contribute to feminists’ justified anger in how Snyder (who has never been concerned with feminism) and Whedon (a self-professed feminist, but whose behavior and past writing suggest otherwise) have portrayed her. Eventually, the film’s roughshod editing between the Snyder and Whedon versions provides a portrait of the Justice League to that is cluttered, confusing, contradictory.

In such a sizable ensemble picture so devoted to narrative and action, it seems useless to comment on performances. With the exception of Cavill and Affleck, every other lead and important supporting cast are doing a serviceable job (for Fisher, Miller, and Momoa, their shining moments will come in their respective movies). Cavill has the muscles, but his charm remains missing despite a more saturated suit for Superman – Cavill remains a more convincing antagonist than a protagonist. Affleck looks and sounds bored. He adds nothing to Bruce Wayne or Batman. Today, it seems even more impossible in film to make the Caped Crusader a sympathetic character – like the one found in the comics and animated television.

It is sympathy that brings us to the direction of this franchise. This paragraph should be read with the understanding that I do not read comic books and that I do not have the emotional ties that many others have to these characters. If Zack Snyder remains sidelined at the DCEU in future installments (unlikely at this juncture, as Warner Bros. did not sack him after multiple critical failures), the franchise’s primary problem will no longer be that it peddles in malformed ideas and soul-heaving darkness. In this case, the primary problem of the DCEU is making its characters sympathetic – allowing the audience to understand each hero’s sense of altruism and showing us where that comes from (e.g. family-instilled values, personal losses processed or otherwise, childhood loneliness into compassion) and having the Justice League become something inspirational to those unable to defend themselves.

Making characters sympathetic sounds simple (anything but!), but it is a good primary problem to have considering the recent history of superhero films. The DCEU has no problems making its superheroes feel larger-than-life. There are few character visibility or recognizability obstacles. As long as the DCEU avoids stunts like Superman’s “death” and Man of Steel’s heinous thesis that the only way for Superman to truly cherish life is to kill someone, its regard for life and understanding of death’s gravity is intact. These are foundational aspects of superhero narratives that must be recognized. Regarding sympathetic superheroes, the DCEU has Wonder Woman (the MCU wasted Captain America due to a convoluted conspiracy-thriller maze of an overarching plot and an unwillingness or inability to meditate on mature themes; the DCEU may yet squander Gal Gadot’s Diana) and must endeavor to make its future installments just as appealing. The MCU might be making the better movies, but this is where the DCEU can still mount its challenge.

Again, realize that almost all of the above is dependent on Zack Snyder’s permanent departure from DCEU films and a need for better writers.

Justice League’s music score has become one of the fiercest points of contention among hardened fans. Just as the DCEU has become the most visible battleground for the soul of superhero movies, it is also the frontline for the future of film scoring. In June 2017, Junkie XL (2015′s Mad Max: Fury Road, Batman v Superman) was replaced with Danny Elfman (1989′s Batman, 1990′s Edward Scissorhands). Junkie XL, who has collaborated multiple times with Zimmer, is a DJ and audio engineer first, a composer second (sorry, but all those categories are distinct), and is interested in rhythm and ambience. Elfman, who has composed for superhero media for almost thirty years, is classically influenced with a rock and ska background, and has always been regarded for his melodic and harmonic constructions. American movies – whether independents or major studio tentpoles – have been moving away from traditional orchestra-based film scoring in recent years in favor of electronic music and Zimmer’s drum “choruses”. Controversy among DC fans ensued when Elfman announced he would recall his theme to 1989′s Batman and John Williams’ Superman theme rather than continue some of Zimmer’s previous musical ideas – the number of incendiary personal attacks directed against Elfman have been sickening and reflective of a lack of understanding of film music conventions and history.

I personally have mixed feelings about the Elfman score. While I despise Zimmer and his associates/ghostwriters’ DCEU contributions and refuse to believe their music is “revolutionary” in the ways they boast, Elfman’s decision to undermine the musical continuity of the DCEU resembles the compositional debacles with the MCU. The 1989 Batman theme is an imperfect, but adequate fit for Affleck’s Batman (variations can be heard early in “Batman on the Roof”; Elfman restrains himself until “Then There Were Three”); Cavill’s sleep-inducing Superman does not yet deserve the soaring strings and inspiring brass and woodwinds that fit Christopher Reeve’s portrayal of the Man of Steel (Williams’ theme is buried underneath a thunderous sound mix, but its renditions in minor key suggests Elfman considered Cavill’s Superman and applied the theme in a suitable fashion). In ways that Hans Zimmer and Junkie XL could never provide, Wonder Woman’s theme is, for the first time, not played by electric cello, but by lower strings, brass, and guitar in “Wonder Woman Rescue”– diversifying the instrumentation is almost always rewarding, as evidenced here. Less developed are Elfman’s hints to themes for Aquaman, Cyborg, and The Flash for any future composers to build upon if they so desire.

For all my gripes about the score and lack of new, recognizable motifs (Elfman’s score is motif-heavy), film composers rooted in classical music have an advantage over composers using drum choruses and harsh electronics: orchestras are more capable to carry multiple, harmonically independent themes in a single cue and have those themes in dialogue with each other. And though it is played underneath the combat, “The Final Battle” is a gorgeous orchestral action cue combining motifs that – and it feels so strange to write this – help tell the story of the battle.

Adjusted for inflation, Justice League is the third-most expensive film ever made – behind the 2011 and 2007 Pirates of the Caribbean movies and ahead of Titanic (1997). With extensive reshoots and a committed effort by Warner Bros. for an extremely late, movie-saving operation, Whedon’s interventions improve the film, even if Justice League is a Frankenstein’s monster of a movie in all of its tonal inconsistency. As expectations beforehand remained abysmal, this Justice League is the best possible movie that could have been made with the talent attached to it. With the exception of perhaps Star Wars, the production history of the DCEU is just as dramatic as the events on-screen. Justice League shows that the producers, directors, and writers of the DCEU are actively learning from their prior mistakes.

The challenge is now to make these comic book superheroes into the ideal that their creators, decades ago, imagined for themselves, their readers, those who can still differentiate between justice and mercy.

My rating: 6/10

^ Based on my personal imdb rating. My interpretation of that ratings system can be found here.

[theselfhelphipster]

A few nights ago, I was dead tired yet couldn’t sleep so I did what any exhausted woman in need of inspiration would do.

…I bought four Beyoncé themed book on Amazon Kindle.

One of them is terrible and will not be be reviewed. But considering I read one of them in two days, it’s definitely Queen Bey Book Review time.

Discovery

As I said, dead tired me searched Amazon Kindle for Beyoncé books, and found four I deemed interesting enough to purchase. This one is a collection of essays on Beyonce’s artistry, activisme and performances, and it is 8.50$ on Kindle.

The Queen Bey book is a collection of essays edited by Veronica Chambers; it came out in March only this year. Veronica Chambers is an Afro-Latina writer and editor, and her body of work is amazing. I am definitely checking out the other work. I’m starting with the body of essays she edited on Michelle Obama and her non-fictions next.

Subject

The greatest female performer of my generation and perhaps generations to come, the black woman who has made history and paved the way, the female icon so many of us are inspired by: Beyoncé.

(Also known as the person I named my cat after)

The book consists of essays by amazing people, most of whom I did not know! Out of the 20 people it’s 16 woman versus 4 men, which I obviously like. Most of them work in media, write for a living or are professors in women’s history, black history, or both.

They take on all these different aspects of Beyoncé’s incredibly body of work (Beychella, Single Ladies, Lemonade), but there are also essays about her life: The importance of Jay-Z’s apology to her on 4:44, the elevator incident and her career and influence on the world in general.

Kookiness (1-10):

Zero, but if you’re not a Beyoncé fan or interested in intersectional and black feminism, and the unique struggle that black women face, then this might not be the book for you — or this is actually the book for you, I might argue.

These essays are well-written, analytical, sometimes critical even on Queen Bey, and seeing it is based on the real world, real art and a real woman? I don’t think it’s kooky at all.

My Favourite Quotes:

“Beyoncé’s break was mega to me, because it was as if she was declaring, “I have no doubt or concern about staying on top.” She was playing her own game. She was writing her own rules. While it would be a while before she declared herself Queen Bey (and occasionally King Bey), I think the hiatus she took in 2010 was her first truly sovereign act.” – Veronica Chambers

“What might a Black girl be in this world? Everything. And where might she go? Everywhere.” – Veronica Chambers.

“[Beychella] is also a lesson for everyone: NO MATTER HOW GOOD YOU ARE, THERE WILL BE PEOPLE WHO DON’T LIKE YOU. And that is okay. Keep doing what you were doing anyway. There are people who don’t think Beyoncé is talented. So you KNOW there will be people who don’t think your work is remotely good. Keep doing it anyway.”- Luvvie Ajayi

“In a way, we’re all on the same journey with Beyoncé. […] And now, especially where I am in my career and looking at her, I understand that idea of having to go through a baptism where you bless yourself with the water and you ordain yourself a new woman.” – Lena Waithe

“To me, power is making things happen without asking for permission. It’s affecting the way people perceive themselves and the world around them.” – Elodie Mailliet Storm

“Sometimes people aren’t willing to take a visible political stance because it can backfire. Colin Kapernick is being blacklisted for his political stance. I have such a deep respect for his courage to do the right thing despite the backlash. Andre Lorde once wrote, “When we speak we are afraid our words will not be heard or welcomes. But when we are silent, we are still afraid. So it is better to speak.” – Carmen Perez

“She makes everyone around her pull up. She works so hard. It’s tough to find that type of work ethic.” – Fatima Robinson

“It’s easier to make a name of yourself than it is to sustain it. To sustain it, you have to constantly grow and reinvent yourself.” – Fatima Robinson

“[after Sasha Fierce ‘retired’], Bey had no more need for alter egos. She showed up wherever she chose, as her fully integrated complex, grown-and-unapologetic self.” – Caroline Clarke

Self Help Hipster Stamp of Approval

I think Beyoncé is one of the most important cultural icons alive, and I can get emotional over what an important part she has played in my life, but also in the world. I wrote my Lemonade album review and stated:

She is using her power for a good cause: representation of black women, their power, their struggles and the rights and privileges they have lacked and still lack to this day. I feel Beyonce is making a statement that is probably more complex and delicate than I can wrap my head around.

I mean, I’m happy for me that I get to be inspired by her, her music and her art. But I fully recognise her work is much more significant than the fact it makes me grind a little harder, hold my head a little higher and feel like a bad bitch whenever I play Top Off from the Homecoming Album.

And so this bundle of essays is a must for anyone who LOVES Beyoncé.

This book showcases just how big Beyoncé’s impact has been and how much more than just a pop artist, and in how many ways she is an important inspiration to people everywhere.

So baby, if you’re a part of the Beyhive? I hope this Queen Bey book review influenced you to go read this book to appreciate our King Bey even more.

[sharkchunks]

Ten Great Movie Characters*

Okay so I’ll be honest, if not modest- My four favorite movie characters are Don, Clarke, Quail and above all Bridge from Jealous Gods. It’s to be expected that when you can make a character exactly who you want to see on screen, they’re going to be your favorite characters. But I do have some favorites outside of that film. In alphabetical order with no preferences between them, here are some of my favorite characters:

Travis Bickle - Taxi Driver (1976)

Robert De Niro

Travis is an awful person by every possible measure. Racist, angry, paranoid, jumpy, quite an idiot and far more but he’s probably the best representation of how and why people can go so wrong, yet still exist in the world. His relationship with Betsy is perversely innocent- He doesn’t understand why she might not want to go to a porn flick on a first date, it’s beyond him. The representation of his transmutation of his infatuation for her into plans for political violence is a stroke of writing genius, as is his similarly dangerous hero complex where Iris is concerned. Travis wants to be good, but he’s rotten to the core and ‘good’ to him is a fantasy concept.

Llewyn Davis - Inside Llewyn Davis (2013)

Oscar Isaac

Davis is the perfect character for a Coen Brothers world. While Marge Gunderson normally claims that distinction, Davis is far more flawed and the Coens’ plots thrive on flaws. Davis is a narcissist of a type rarely seen in film, the type of person who doesn’t understand why he’s such a disaster magnet. As skilled at music as he is unskilled at living, he nonetheless keeps moving. He’s always in motion with no destination. Davis is the ultimate beatnik, stuck a few decades too late in a world that has no place for him.

Gollum - The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

Anthony Serkis, Weta Digital

Fantasy characters are at an extreme disadvantage when it comes to realism in character because they exist in worlds unlike our own. Gollum works for two reasons: First, he’s based on drug addicts. The subtext seeps from Two Towers into a great pool surrounding the character. Second, he’s treated with respect. Being a “Creature” rather than a heroic lead, he could’ve easily been another CG crapfest, but Jackson chose to make him a person. Two of them actually, and that’s what makes him so much fun to watch. Gollum is an exceptionally advanced character in concept and execution, and is proof that even when it comes to the most basic elements of cinema, we are still finding new frontiers.

Carol Ledoux - Repulsion (1965)

Catherine Deneuve

Carol is an extremely realistic portrayal of an amalgam of real psychological issues, making her the ultimate representation of insanity. None of her problems are simply made up as so many insane characters are in film, rather they are artistically augmented into a highly compelling yet simultaneously repulsive character. The world attacks her and she has no escape, but with a few plot exceptions, these attacks are things that would only affect Carol herself so severely, such as finding a shaving razor in a cup she uses for her toothbrush. For her, the razor becomes phallic and like so many other things, it’s violating. This is a place all humans have within them. With Carol, it’s on the surface, and it makes her very dangerous.

John Milton - The Devil’s Advocate (1997)

Al Pacino

Spoiler warning, he’s Satan. And it’s appropriate he named himself John Milton because next to Paradise Lost, this film may be the best character study of the devil ever made. Milton is, naturally, a lawyer. His bravado is supernaturally backed up, his cruelty is all to human. He is a wholly realistic man, but he is powered by a biblical generator of evil. He is fun, he is enviable, and his arguments against God are so effective that they seem logically sound, along with his demeanor and hedonism. This is Anton LaVey’s own devil in every way.

Ellen Ripley - Aliens (1986)

Sigourney Weaver

Alien created Ellen Ripley from a role written as a male without changing a line. This was a great leap for cinematic feminism at the time. But she was not yet Ellen Ripley as we know her. Who we know as Ripley was created more by James Cameron when he turned her into a heroine rather than a survivor. Ripley begins the film unwilling and ends the film as the most badass power-loader operator in the galaxy. She does so partly out of maternal instinct for Newt, but her character in Aliens goes far beyond this and develops a character arc like absolutely nothing else in cinema.

Jack Skellington - The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993)

Chris Sarandon, Danny Elfman, Walt Disney Feature Animation

Jack is unhappy with his job. Simple as that. He’s bored and he wants to try something new, and being constrained by his very nature as the embodiment of Halloween, he ruins it. This is so human it’s painful to see, and he is ultimately incredibly sympathetic. But what makes him a great character is his final revelation that though he’s wrecked Christmas, he’s the damn Pumpkin King and that’s friggin’ awesome. Thus his journey is one of self realization and the renewal of pride in ones self.

Tony Stark - Iron Man (2008)

Robert Downey Jr.

He’s a jerk, and a merchant of death. Basically the worst kind of person. His arc (no pun intended) is set off by far from altruistic means, but by survival. That’s the thing about Stark- He never actually becomes much of a better person. he remains a blaggard and a cynic, but his actions begin to play at altruism simply because it’s what he feels he wants to do. Stark is in many ways irredeemable, yet his charismatic nature and incredible genius (and let’s face it, enviable wealth) make him extremely compelling to watch.

Billy Ray Valentine - Trading Places (1983)

Eddie Murphy

Valentine is an impoverished scammer who never had a chance to be anything better. Then he gets the chance, and he explodes into the scene with skill and intelligence that he always had, but could never use. While his counterpart in the film descends and he ascends the social ladder, what becomes critical is that he never loses himself and degenerates into the vices of wealth. He’s proof that a good person only needs a chance to be good. And he does it all with panache.

Albert Emanuel Vogler - The Magician (1958)

Max von Sydow

It’s impossible to explain this one without fatal spoilers. See the movie.

*Mishima and Bronson belong on this list but they’re real people so I can’t really include them in the character post, despite their film counterparts being very creative representations. They aren’t characters that someone designed, they’re real people. And even more importantly, this list is in part a recognition of realistic characters. Both Mishima and Bronson are far too unrealistic to be believed as film characters.

[therewasabrowncrow]

Doodled the chapter “Feminist safe spaces in the digital age”- from Building a Digital Girl Army:The cultivation of feminist safe spaces online by  Rosemary Clark-Parsons. 

Text:

Feminist Safe Spaces In The Digital Age

The concept of safe space emerged in the late twentieth century in the United States with the rise of the “new social movements,” the feminist, queer, and anti-racist movements whose participants prioritized sociopolitical and cultural concerns, such as identity based discrimination and violence, over economic inequalities (Melucci, 1989). 

Within the context of the US women’s liberation movement during the 1960s and 1970s, the so-called “second wave” of feminism, safe spaces promoted freedom from violence and harassment and, as Kenney (2001) explains, provided “a certain license to speak and act freely, form collective strength, and generate strategies for resistance” (p. 24). The archetypal feminist safe space was the separatist, women-only, consciousness-raising group,where the license to speak and act freely was instated not merely for the therapeutic purposes of voicing personal experiences but also “to get to the most radical truths about the situation of women in order to take radical action” (Sarachild, 1978), to identify the systematic injustices women face in order to collectively organize for change. In this way, Civil Rights-era feminist safe spaces functioned as what social movement scholars have called free spaces, “small-scale settings within a community or movement that are removed from the direct control of dominant groups, are voluntarily participated in, and generate the cultural challenge that precedes or accompanies political mobilization” (Polletta, 1999: 1). 

Second-wave feminist safe spaces were convened to operate as one version of Melucci’s (1989) “submerged networks,” where activists could meet outside the public eye to discuss social issues, develop frameworks for interpreting them, and organize collective action accordingly. While formal and informal impediments curtailed women’s participation in the public sphere, as Fraser (1992) argues, feminist safe spaces operated as subaltern counterpublic spheres or “parallel discursive arenas where members of subordinated social groups invent and circulate counter discourses, which in turn permit them to formulate oppositional interpretations of their identities, interests, and needs” (p. 67). Successful second-wave feminist counterpublics, as Fraser argues, required active maintenance; members had to work to expose and remedy obstacles to participatory parity in order to create a space conducive to free expression. The cultivation of safe, communal spaces for free and open expression remains a key political priority among contemporary feminists organizing in the age of digital media. Keller (2016), in her ethnographic study of girl feminist bloggers, explores how blogs function as an accessible “discursive space” (p. 14), where young women develop feminist identities and alternative feminist histories through personal reflections and Clark-Parsons 2129 interactions with one another, forming a “networked counterpublic” (p. 80). Drawing on boyd’s (2014) theory of networked publics, Keller explains that unlike second-wave counterpublics, the networked counterpublics of girl feminist bloggers are persistent, replicable, searchable, and often, participants can remain invisible to one another. Due to their networked nature, online feminist counterpublics also have a greater capacity for growth, which, in turn, magnifies their ability to launch interventions on the broader public sphere (Keller, 2016). Feminist counterpublics networked across a variety of online platforms have mobilized highly visible collective action campaigns against online and offline misogyny and fostered transnational feminist communities. Rentschler (2014) highlights how digital feminist tactics, like hashtag feminism, feminist blogging, and the anti-street harassment app Hollaback, create “feminist networks of response-ability to rape culture” (p. 68), which cultivate the capacity for collective responses to individual experiences of sexual violence. In a case study that exemplifies this networked response-ability, Mendes (2015) traces how the networked counterpublic of the feminist blogosphere was crucial for sparking SlutWalk, a global street protest movement against sexual violence and rape culture that began in 2011; the same networks later became critical spaces for feminists to debate the intersectional politics of the movement’s tactics and messages. Another study conducted by Rentschler and Thrift (2015) demonstrates how “networked community building” (p. 330) has unfolded through the viral spread of feminist memes, like the 2012 Mitt Romney-inspired “Binders Full of Women” meme; by constructing and circulating memes, feminists not only engage in collective acts of political critique but also foster communal ties through shared humor that cut across differences. Keller et al. (2016) refer to communal ties formed via social media among women and girls as “affective solidarities,” or connections rooted in emotional responses to shared oppressive experiences, such as sexual violence. In her research on the Australian feminist blogosphere, Shaw (2013), expanding on the work of Herring et al., (2002), highlights the range of strategies feminist bloggers use to successfully defend these communal ties against disruptive trolls and violent harassers, including moderation, exposure, and humor. 

Focusing on the inner group conflict, Loza (2014) traces how feminists of color, through networked campaigns like #SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen, push feminist counterpublics toward more reflexive and inclusive community practices. Collective efforts to develop digital tools for navigating and interrupting online harassment compliment these networked community-building efforts, including FemTechNet’s (2017) Center for Solutions to Online Violence, a digital hub for rapid response and educational resources. Existing scholarship outlines the political work feminist counterpublics perform in a digital public sphere where gender-based harassment has become an established norm.

Missing, however, is an empirical focus on private digital feminist spaces formed with the intention of cultivating closed-off, separatist, safe spaces, whose protective boundaries filter harassment and foster open dialog about questions, topics, and concerns marginalized within the public sphere. This tactic, which more closely resembles the “submerged networks” (Melucci, 1989) of second-wave feminist safe spaces than publicly accessible feminist blogs, hashtags, and apps, has become a popular practice among contemporary feminists. A search for “feminist” on Facebook, for example, reveals hundreds of “closed” groups that range in theme from general feminist discussion to  particular feminist movements, issues, identities, and demographics. Facebook users can only join and see content published in a closed group after being approved by an existing member. “Secret” groups like Girl Army are more clandestine; only members can find the group through Facebook’s search function and new members must be invited by existing members and approved by moderators. Significantly for my purposes here, across their group descriptions, dozens of these communities purport to be “safe spaces.”

How do feminists use the Facebook group platform to cultivate safe spaces online? As Barrett (2010) laments, the ambiguity of “safe space,” while enabling a certain degree of flexibility in practice, has led the term to become “an overused by undertheorized metaphor” (1) in both academic and activist discourses, a shortcut for gesturing toward presumably shared attitudes regarding the openness of a space to certain identities and ideologies. “Safe space,” in other words, is too often treated as a closed concept that can be taken up and transplanted across a variety of contexts, without much adaptation, specification, or reflection, which, in turn, may cause in-group conflict or, worse, endanger participants’ physical and psychological wellbeing (Stengel, 2010). Given, as Keller (2016) argues, networked counterpublic’s capacity for exponential growth, one can imagine how maintaining safe space in a Facebook group might become problematic without constant moderation and self-reflexivity; the most popular closed feminist Facebook groups have upwards of 3000 members. What political functions do these spaces fulfill? What role do they play in members’ everyday lives? What does safety mean in the context of a Facebook group with hundreds or even thousands of members, who bring with them a variety of opinions, experiences, and identities and whose personally identifying information is often readily accessible? What ideal for safety do these Facebook feminists strive for through their group participation and are they successful? To begin answering these questions, I follow the Roestone Collective’s (2014) call for scholars and activists to “treat safe space as a living concept, identifying tendencies and variations in its use, and recognizing its situatedness in multiple contexts” (p. 1347).

Instead of treating “safe space” as a closed concept or particular formation that can be implemented and identified across different settings, the Roestone Collective reconceptualizes safe space as “relational work” (p. 1348), as constantly unfolding social processes rather than sites with structures that preexist their participants’ interactions. While cautioning against a normative theory of how safe spaces should be cultivated, the Roestone Collective highlights certain “paradoxes” that emerge from the relational work required to cultivate a safe space in any context, although the specifics of these processes vary according to how notions of “safety” and “danger” are constructed in different settings. 

According to the Collective, the relational work invested into safe spaces involves both reifying the binaries that marginalize groups in order to create a space explicitly for them and drawing inevitably exclusionary boundaries around the people that space is meant to protect and uplift. The Collective’s aim is not, however, to suggest that safe spaces should not exist; rather, by framing safe spaces as constantly in flux and always already incomplete, they direct researchers’ attention toward the processes through which safe spaces are cultivated and encourage safe space organizers to incorporate reflexivity in their cultivation practices.

Digital media, however, are conspicuously absent from the Roestone Collective’s (2014) analysis, despite their writing in a time when the Internet has radically reconfigured the relational work behind everyday interactions and their consideration of the role non-human actors can play in safe space networks. Here, following the lead of existing scholarship on publicly accessible online feminist communities, I use Fraser’s (1992) conceptualization of subaltern counterpublics as an entry point for examining the ways in which Girl Army members discursively and technologically draw boundaries around their secret Facebook group as a feminist safe space. Drawing on interviews and 9 months of ethnographic fieldwork, I argue that Girl Army has taken the shape of a networked, counterpublic, safe space, where participants “formulate oppositional interpretations of their identities, interests, and needs” (Fraser, 1992: 67) through their boundary-maintenance work. Fraser’s emphasis on oppositional actions—counterpublics’ development of counter- discourses and identities—underscores the relational boundary work performed among members and between members and nonmembers to create their separatist safe space. This oppositional work reifies particular in-group and out-group binaries that, as the Roestone Collective (2014) argues, paradoxically maintain and undermine the space’s safety.

[smokeybrandreviews]

Smokey brand Movie Reviews: Just a Girl

So i saw Captain Marvel opening day. I was part of that rush, yes. Cap was one of my most anticipated films of the year for me. She’s actually my fifth favorite Marvel character, second favorite female character. When i heard she was getting a film, i was apprehensive. No one knows who Cap is. They don’t know how powerful she is. Hell, how would that power-set translate to the MCU? When they announced Brie Larson was going to play Carol, i was concerned. Not because Brie is a feminist or man-hater as the less intelligent parts of the internet would like to focus on, but more she didn’t fit the bill for an MCU hero. Larson is an excellent actress, one of my favorite working today. What she ain’t, is charismatic. There’s a different type of energy you need to carry an MCU film and Marvel has done an excellent job of finding people who capture that spirit. Brie has never demonstrated, in any of her roles, an ability to do that. I was super on the fence about this entire situation. I want this film to succeed. I want it to be good. I want Captain Marvel to get he shine she deserves. My fingers were crossed this would be good. And then the less intelligent parts of the internet got to it.

I wrote about this at length in my Captain Controversy post. The thing about Captain Marvel, the thing that i love about her, is the small moments. When she interacts with other characters, she's super on point. In a team dynamic, Carol is amazing. On her own? Not so much. This stems from the fact that the origins of her character are from that whole women lib movement of the 70s. She's a rule 63 of the original Captain Marvel, Mar-Vell. She-Hulk kind of has the same issues but, given proper writing and development, they both shine. Carol, however, has not had the same luck in that department as Jessica and it shows. Throughout the years, as a comic entity, Carol's had, like, three stories that have been dope - all of them occurring in the late 00s until now. Bendis has done a great service in developing Carol into her own, independent, personality and the recent revelations in her new origin, The Life of Captain Marvel, have gone a long way to establishing a future where Captain Marvel can be great. She has a ton of potential to be excellent and I think, as a creator, I am drawn to that aspect of her. Plus, she has had some really dope costumes over the years. Now, I said three good stories because the bulk of Captain Marvel in modern Marvel comics, has, more or less, become a poster child for gender politics and THAT sh*t is whack! That sh*t is why none of the fanboys want to have anything to do with this character. And casting Brie Larson, a very vocal feminist, does not help in any capacity. All of that White Male Outrage has review bombed the f*ck out of this film and I don't think it deserves any of it. I think, removed from all of the butt-hurt Menisists and fragile male egos, there are very real issues with this film. Issues that hinder but never detract. This is why I took so much time before writing this review. I actually wanted to digest what I saw on the screen and try to distance myself from my admitted bias and this weird, sad, unwarranted hate, this flick has been getting. So, with a properly digested understanding of what I saw, here is what I thought about Captain Marvel.

The Good

They changed the opening Marvel title card from MCU events, to all of  Stan Lee's cameos and that sh*t hurt, man. They ended it with “Thank You, Stan.” The entire theater lost it. It's been a few months, but that loss still hurts, man. Marvel Comics means a lot to me and Stan is one of the principal architects. Say what you will about the quality of his character, the strength of his work will stand the test of time.

Speaking of Stan Lee cameos, this is easily his second best after the one he had in Spider-Verse. If you're a 90s kid, or someone who grew up during the 90s, you'll know why. It's f*cking brilliant and I loved it. I bet Kevin Smith did, too.

Sam Jackson knocks it out of the park as usual. His Nick Fury has been the linchpin of the MCU since way back in the Iron Man stinger. You see a lot of who he was before all of the responsibility and SHIELD clout, which was mad refreshing. If we loose RDJ, I think we'll be alright if we can keep Sam around for the occasional pop-in.

I think Brie Larson did fantastic in her first stint as Carol. I mean, with the exception of RDJ and Tom Holland, who f*cking knocked it out of the park as Pete, every other MCU hero needed time to grow and figure out HOW to be those characters. We had, what? Three different Hulks before they hit that sweet spot with Ruffalo? It took Hemsworth four movies before he cracked Thor? Hell, Cummerbund had to have two films and an end credits stinger to get Strange right. What I'm saying is, a lot of what cats are dinging Larson for, will work itself out over time. Especially when she gets into the think of it with everyone else in Endgame. Also, a better script and director would go a long way to helping that growth, as well.

The chemistry between Carol and Nick was wonderful. His movie is a buddy cop flick more so than any other in the MCU so far. I think Carol needs that to play off and, in the comics, she usually has Jessica Drew, Spider-Woman, to do a lot of that with. Considering it looks like the MCU is going in another direction with that, which is a shame because that dynamic would be awesome to see onscreen, what we got with Fury and Danvers was great.

This guy Ben Medelshon? How great of an actor is he? Dude is almost always the best part of any film he's in, even if they're trash. Like, he was the best thing but Ready Player One and that movie was a right clusterf*ck. Mendelsohn in this, is just as brilliant as he was in that, pulling off what no other villain in the MCU forced to wear such heavy face make-up has been able to do; Act. Mendelsohn's  Talos, even caked with an inch of green paint, was never not charismatic and human. Dude was amazing and it kind of paints the MCU into a corner as to how to make these cats terrorists later which is messed up. I was kind of looking forward to Veranke...

The soundtrack for this thing s probably the best since Black Panther. Personally, being of negro descent, I think THAT soundtrack is the best of the MCU. Kendrick created a goddamn masterpiece, man. But I would imagine the more accessible Awesome Mix vol 1 is more the masses speed and, I agree. That sh*t is awesome. I haven't heard all of Vol 2 so I can't comment on that one but, what we got in Captain Marvel, was absolutely wonderful. There's a scene where No Doubt's Just a girl starts playing and it made me smile. It's a little on the nose but still, a great time.

Goose was awesome. I kind of hate that they changed her name from Chewie to Goose, but I get why. Air Force. Top Gun. Danger Zone. Clever. Flerkens and Feminism, man.

Speaking of, the message this movie sends for little girls is amazing. Wonder Woman had kind of the same effect but I think Captain Marvel is the superior film, overall. That and Carol is literally the nuclear deterrent of the MCU. She is, by far, the most powerful hero on the Avengers roster. For it to be a woman? Fantastic! I've seen so many positive affirmations and uplifting testimonials from women about how this movie made them feel. That sh*t is important, man. I'm all about representation in media so to have such a monumental moment being taken in like it should, in spite of such... immature hostility, was great. When I was walking out of the theater, I saw a little girl absolutely gushing about how cool Captain Marvel was and that sh*t legit made me smile. She's a fan for life and might grow up to be the next great creator who makes some pretty cool stuff because she went to see a movie, about a girl who can do some pretty cool stuff. If that sh*t doesn't make you feel good, you're an asshole and need to get off my page, post-haste.

This movie is f*cking gorgeous. Cap's powers translated to the screen brilliantly and even her Binary mode was something to behold. Like, if we ever get a proper, live action, DBZ, they should take note because watching her go super saiyan was f*cking amazing. It kind of sucks she had no one to go super saiyan against. I'd loved to have seen her go up against Ronan and his hammer but nope. Maybe next time? Even more than that, the de-aging effect of Fury was kind of miraculous. Sam Jackson looked younger than his stint as Jules in Pulp Fiction, which is suppose to be out around that time in the film. I was shocked.

The Meh

The supporting cast in this was a little flaccid. They felt more like meat targets than viable characters in this flick. Everyone touted Gemma Chan's Min'Erva as someone to watch but, nope. She didn't do much but sit on a rock/platform and shoot things from distance. The return of Son of Coal? Nope. Like, 4 minutes of Clark Gregg, which sucked. Annette Bening? One of the greatest actresses to ever grace Hollywood? Pulling double duty as a gender swapped Mar-Vell and The Great Intelligence? Nope. She literally just stood or laid around in every one of her scenes. Lee Pace? Man, this didn't even bother giving Ronan the face makeup. Jude Law was Yon-Rogg was completely underused. I think, though, that everyone except Jackson and Brie were underused.

Kind of in that same vein, the overall character development In this was... underwhelming? You never get a feel for who Carol is. Even when she commits to one personae over another, you don't really care. She's dope, overall, but that's more because of her interactions with Fury than any semblance of self realization on her part. Essentially, the weakest part of this film stems from how the writing let the main character down. This thing doesn't look like there was a lot of Marvel Films edicts to bog it down so there should have be a wealth of free range to develop this character. We did not get any of that. Maybe in future films but this one? Nah.

This thing has no idea what it wants to be, where it wants to go, or how it wants to get there. The tonal whiplash in this movie is crazy jarring. The performances and effects do a great job of distracting  you from most of that but, if you're paying attention to the structure of this film, you can see it clearly. There was no path, no consensus, on how to introduce this character and her story. In that regard, this is one of the weakest of the MCU films, for sure.

There are hints of a grander scope in this flick. We saw a bit of Hala. We saw a bit of the Accusers. We learned a bit more about the Kree. The Starforce interactions were awesome. The second we get to earth? All of that out the window. That could be forgiven if what we witnessed on earth was more fleshed-out, more organic, but this was kind of a paint-by-numbers tale. I think that has a lot to do with the direction. Speaking of which...

The Bad

Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck were the wrong people to make this movie. You needed someone with the vision to deliver a massive space opera but focus in on the character struggle and inner conflict of Carol Danvers. You had a great actress to help pull of that vision but the ones trying to guide that performance were out of their depth I think. The pair do a lot of low budget, character driven, indie flicks, and that's fine. Those films have a very specific tone, a very specific line of execution. That type of storytelling does not lend itself to a tent pole MCU film. Sure, Marvel has been great as finding diamonds in the rough to make masterworks out of the mundane (The Russos, James Gunn, Ryan Coogler) but they have also had a lot of misses. Whoever did the first two Thor films, letting Edgar Wright go over creative differences, and now these two cats. I'm not saying they are bad directors but, for this type of film? Horrible choice, I think.

Kind of in that same discussion has to be the mediocrity of the overall writing. The dialogue in some of these interactions was outright awful. Like, anytime Ronan was on screen, I kind of groaned. Anytime Bening had airtime, I rolled my eyes. These excellent actors that I've seen give much better performances in other flicks, had next to nothing to work with in this flick. That can be said about everyone in this movie. I feel like there should have been much more care given to this script considering it's going to be Carol who carries the next Phase of Marvel films.

While I loves the Grrrl power message laced throughout this flick, the way it was delivered seems a little heavy handed at times. That scene where Just A Girl playing? I love that sh*t. But, at the same time, I can see how it could alienate a vast swath of fans. It's ill to me because why shouldn't we celebrate a powerful woman coming into her own? I, personally, don't see anything wrong with it but I'd be considered a cuck by men less than myself and that's who will have an issue with this. Unfortunately, they make up a massive portion of the fanbase who see capeflicks. That being said, even with all of the tirades, tantrums, and review bombs, Cap might break 100 mil, which is great for the franchise and the MCU overall.

There is a real lack of imagination in this movie and I think it goes back to the the choice in directors. I touched on it a little before, but, I mean, you have a galactic space opera, taking place on two planets, with a ludicrously OP, female, protagonist who has amnesia so is an absolute clean slate, and the best you can do is a sun-of-the-mill, fish out of water tale? F*cking really? There are little moments of brilliance here and there but overall, this was underwhelming for 9ne of the most powerful character in Marvel comics.

The Verdict

I really enjoyed Captain Marvel. I thought it was a decent introduction to a character that had, up until very recently, no direction in the lore of the Marvel mythos. This movie has it's issues, for sure, but I think these things can be fixed with a different director, a better script, and much, much, more imagination. I think the biggest issue with this thing is the utter lack of Marvel. It doesn't feel like a Marvel film. It feels like a Marvel film by way of Fox or Sony. This is, more or less, because the character of Captain Marvel is also so wayward. There are a lot of good ideas here and I am convinced Brie Larson can develop into something special, but it's going to take a while.  It's going to take someone with a clear vision for spectacle and respect for character. Thor took a while and Taika Waititi to be great. Strange took a while and the Russos to feel organic. Lang took a while but, I mean, Paul Rudd was awesome from the get. He just shines much. Much better when alongside others. I think going forward, if Feige can find that right balance of creativity and vision in the creatives behind the camera, Captain Marvel will be great. As she is now, just like this movie, she's fun but hollow. Marvel hasn't cracked Captain Marvel just yet but when they do, she'll be absolutely Marvelous. Ultimately, I'd say check it out. It's beautiful, entertaining, and Sam Jackson is always awesome. For a weekend distraction, you can do much worse.

[smokeybrand]

Smokey brand Movie Reviews: Just a Girl

So i saw Captain Marvel opening day. I was part of that rush, yes. Cap was one of my most anticipated films of the year for me. She’s actually my fifth favorite Marvel character, second favorite female character. When i heard she was getting a film, i was apprehensive. No one knows who Cap is. They don’t know how powerful she is. Hell, how would that power-set translate to the MCU? When they announced Brie Larson was going to play Carol, i was concerned. Not because Brie is a feminist or man-hater as the less intelligent parts of the internet would like to focus on, but more she didn’t fit the bill for an MCU hero. Larson is an excellent actress, one of my favorite working today. What she ain’t, is charismatic. There’s a different type of energy you need to carry an MCU film and Marvel has done an excellent job of finding people who capture that spirit. Brie has never demonstrated, in any of her roles, an ability to do that. I was super on the fence about this entire situation. I want this film to succeed. I want it to be good. I want Captain Marvel to get he shine she deserves. My fingers were crossed this would be good. And then the less intelligent parts of the internet got to it.

I wrote about this at length in my Captain Controversy post. The thing about Captain Marvel, the thing that i love about her, is the small moments. When she interacts with other characters, she's super on point. In a team dynamic, Carol is amazing. On her own? Not so much. This stems from the fact that the origins of her character are from that whole women lib movement of the 70s. She's a rule 63 of the original Captain Marvel, Mar-Vell. She-Hulk kind of has the same issues but, given proper writing and development, they both shine. Carol, however, has not had the same luck in that department as Jessica and it shows. Throughout the years, as a comic entity, Carol's had, like, three stories that have been dope - all of them occurring in the late 00s until now. Bendis has done a great service in developing Carol into her own, independent, personality and the recent revelations in her new origin, The Life of Captain Marvel, have gone a long way to establishing a future where Captain Marvel can be great. She has a ton of potential to be excellent and I think, as a creator, I am drawn to that aspect of her. Plus, she has had some really dope costumes over the years. Now, I said three good stories because the bulk of Captain Marvel in modern Marvel comics, has, more or less, become a poster child for gender politics and THAT sh*t is whack! That sh*t is why none of the fanboys want to have anything to do with this character. And casting Brie Larson, a very vocal feminist, does not help in any capacity. All of that White Male Outrage has review bombed the f*ck out of this film and I don't think it deserves any of it. I think, removed from all of the butt-hurt Menisists and fragile male egos, there are very real issues with this film. Issues that hinder but never detract. This is why I took so much time before writing this review. I actually wanted to digest what I saw on the screen and try to distance myself from my admitted bias and this weird, sad, unwarranted hate, this flick has been getting. So, with a properly digested understanding of what I saw, here is what I thought about Captain Marvel.

The Good

They changed the opening Marvel title card from MCU events, to all of  Stan Lee's cameos and that sh*t hurt, man. They ended it with “Thank You, Stan.” The entire theater lost it. It's been a few months, but that loss still hurts, man. Marvel Comics means a lot to me and Stan is one of the principal architects. Say what you will about the quality of his character, the strength of his work will stand the test of time.

Speaking of Stan Lee cameos, this is easily his second best after the one he had in Spider-Verse. If you're a 90s kid, or someone who grew up during the 90s, you'll know why. It's f*cking brilliant and I loved it. I bet Kevin Smith did, too.

Sam Jackson knocks it out of the park as usual. His Nick Fury has been the linchpin of the MCU since way back in the Iron Man stinger. You see a lot of who he was before all of the responsibility and SHIELD clout, which was mad refreshing. If we loose RDJ, I think we'll be alright if we can keep Sam around for the occasional pop-in.

I think Brie Larson did fantastic in her first stint as Carol. I mean, with the exception of RDJ and Tom Holland, who f*cking knocked it out of the park as Pete, every other MCU hero needed time to grow and figure out HOW to be those characters. We had, what? Three different Hulks before they hit that sweet spot with Ruffalo? It took Hemsworth four movies before he cracked Thor? Hell, Cummerbund had to have two films and an end credits stinger to get Strange right. What I'm saying is, a lot of what cats are dinging Larson for, will work itself out over time. Especially when she gets into the think of it with everyone else in Endgame. Also, a better script and director would go a long way to helping that growth, as well.

The chemistry between Carol and Nick was wonderful. His movie is a buddy cop flick more so than any other in the MCU so far. I think Carol needs that to play off and, in the comics, she usually has Jessica Drew, Spider-Woman, to do a lot of that with. Considering it looks like the MCU is going in another direction with that, which is a shame because that dynamic would be awesome to see onscreen, what we got with Fury and Danvers was great.

This guy Ben Medelshon? How great of an actor is he? Dude is almost always the best part of any film he's in, even if they're trash. Like, he was the best thing but Ready Player One and that movie was a right clusterf*ck. Mendelsohn in this, is just as brilliant as he was in that, pulling off what no other villain in the MCU forced to wear such heavy face make-up has been able to do; Act. Mendelsohn's  Talos, even caked with an inch of green paint, was never not charismatic and human. Dude was amazing and it kind of paints the MCU into a corner as to how to make these cats terrorists later which is messed up. I was kind of looking forward to Veranke...

The soundtrack for this thing s probably the best since Black Panther. Personally, being of negro descent, I think THAT soundtrack is the best of the MCU. Kendrick created a goddamn masterpiece, man. But I would imagine the more accessible Awesome Mix vol 1 is more the masses speed and, I agree. That sh*t is awesome. I haven't heard all of Vol 2 so I can't comment on that one but, what we got in Captain Marvel, was absolutely wonderful. There's a scene where No Doubt's Just a girl starts playing and it made me smile. It's a little on the nose but still, a great time.

Goose was awesome. I kind of hate that they changed her name from Chewie to Goose, but I get why. Air Force. Top Gun. Danger Zone. Clever. Flerkens and Feminism, man.

Speaking of, the message this movie sends for little girls is amazing. Wonder Woman had kind of the same effect but I think Captain Marvel is the superior film, overall. That and Carol is literally the nuclear deterrent of the MCU. She is, by far, the most powerful hero on the Avengers roster. For it to be a woman? Fantastic! I've seen so many positive affirmations and uplifting testimonials from women about how this movie made them feel. That sh*t is important, man. I'm all about representation in media so to have such a monumental moment being taken in like it should, in spite of such... immature hostility, was great. When I was walking out of the theater, I saw a little girl absolutely gushing about how cool Captain Marvel was and that sh*t legit made me smile. She's a fan for life and might grow up to be the next great creator who makes some pretty cool stuff because she went to see a movie, about a girl who can do some pretty cool stuff. If that sh*t doesn't make you feel good, you're an asshole and need to get off my page, post-haste.

This movie is f*cking gorgeous. Cap's powers translated to the screen brilliantly and even her Binary mode was something to behold. Like, if we ever get a proper, live action, DBZ, they should take note because watching her go super saiyan was f*cking amazing. It kind of sucks she had no one to go super saiyan against. I'd loved to have seen her go up against Ronan and his hammer but nope. Maybe next time? Even more than that, the de-aging effect of Fury was kind of miraculous. Sam Jackson looked younger than his stint as Jules in Pulp Fiction, which is suppose to be out around that time in the film. I was shocked.

The Meh

The supporting cast in this was a little flaccid. They felt more like meat targets than viable characters in this flick. Everyone touted Gemma Chan's Min'Erva as someone to watch but, nope. She didn't do much but sit on a rock/platform and shoot things from distance. The return of Son of Coal? Nope. Like, 4 minutes of Clark Gregg, which sucked. Annette Bening? One of the greatest actresses to ever grace Hollywood? Pulling double duty as a gender swapped Mar-Vell and The Great Intelligence? Nope. She literally just stood or laid around in every one of her scenes. Lee Pace? Man, this didn't even bother giving Ronan the face makeup. Jude Law was Yon-Rogg was completely underused. I think, though, that everyone except Jackson and Brie were underused.

Kind of in that same vein, the overall character development In this was... underwhelming? You never get a feel for who Carol is. Even when she commits to one personae over another, you don't really care. She's dope, overall, but that's more because of her interactions with Fury than any semblance of self realization on her part. Essentially, the weakest part of this film stems from how the writing let the main character down. This thing doesn't look like there was a lot of Marvel Films edicts to bog it down so there should have be a wealth of free range to develop this character. We did not get any of that. Maybe in future films but this one? Nah.

This thing has no idea what it wants to be, where it wants to go, or how it wants to get there. The tonal whiplash in this movie is crazy jarring. The performances and effects do a great job of distracting  you from most of that but, if you're paying attention to the structure of this film, you can see it clearly. There was no path, no consensus, on how to introduce this character and her story. In that regard, this is one of the weakest of the MCU films, for sure.

There are hints of a grander scope in this flick. We saw a bit of Hala. We saw a bit of the Accusers. We learned a bit more about the Kree. The Starforce interactions were awesome. The second we get to earth? All of that out the window. That could be forgiven if what we witnessed on earth was more fleshed-out, more organic, but this was kind of a paint-by-numbers tale. I think that has a lot to do with the direction. Speaking of which...

The Bad

Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck were the wrong people to make this movie. You needed someone with the vision to deliver a massive space opera but focus in on the character struggle and inner conflict of Carol Danvers. You had a great actress to help pull of that vision but the ones trying to guide that performance were out of their depth I think. The pair do a lot of low budget, character driven, indie flicks, and that's fine. Those films have a very specific tone, a very specific line of execution. That type of storytelling does not lend itself to a tent pole MCU film. Sure, Marvel has been great as finding diamonds in the rough to make masterworks out of the mundane (The Russos, James Gunn, Ryan Coogler) but they have also had a lot of misses. Whoever did the first two Thor films, letting Edgar Wright go over creative differences, and now these two cats. I'm not saying they are bad directors but, for this type of film? Horrible choice, I think.

Kind of in that same discussion has to be the mediocrity of the overall writing. The dialogue in some of these interactions was outright awful. Like, anytime Ronan was on screen, I kind of groaned. Anytime Bening had airtime, I rolled my eyes. These excellent actors that I've seen give much better performances in other flicks, had next to nothing to work with in this flick. That can be said about everyone in this movie. I feel like there should have been much more care given to this script considering it's going to be Carol who carries the next Phase of Marvel films.

While I loves the Grrrl power message laced throughout this flick, the way it was delivered seems a little heavy handed at times. That scene where Just A Girl playing? I love that sh*t. But, at the same time, I can see how it could alienate a vast swath of fans. It's ill to me because why shouldn't we celebrate a powerful woman coming into her own? I, personally, don't see anything wrong with it but I'd be considered a cuck by men less than myself and that's who will have an issue with this. Unfortunately, they make up a massive portion of the fanbase who see capeflicks. That being said, even with all of the tirades, tantrums, and review bombs, Cap might break 100 mil, which is great for the franchise and the MCU overall.

There is a real lack of imagination in this movie and I think it goes back to the the choice in directors. I touched on it a little before, but, I mean, you have a galactic space opera, taking place on two planets, with a ludicrously OP, female, protagonist who has amnesia so is an absolute clean slate, and the best you can do is a sun-of-the-mill, fish out of water tale? F*cking really? There are little moments of brilliance here and there but overall, this was underwhelming for 9ne of the most powerful character in Marvel comics.

The Verdict

I really enjoyed Captain Marvel. I thought it was a decent introduction to a character that had, up until very recently, no direction in the lore of the Marvel mythos. This movie has it's issues, for sure, but I think these things can be fixed with a different director, a better script, and much, much, more imagination. I think the biggest issue with this thing is the utter lack of Marvel. It doesn't feel like a Marvel film. It feels like a Marvel film by way of Fox or Sony. This is, more or less, because the character of Captain Marvel is also so wayward. There are a lot of good ideas here and I am convinced Brie Larson can develop into something special, but it's going to take a while.  It's going to take someone with a clear vision for spectacle and respect for character. Thor took a while and Taika Waititi to be great. Strange took a while and the Russos to feel organic. Lang took a while but, I mean, Paul Rudd was awesome from the get. He just shines much. Much better when alongside others. I think going forward, if Feige can find that right balance of creativity and vision in the creatives behind the camera, Captain Marvel will be great. As she is now, just like this movie, she's fun but hollow. Marvel hasn't cracked Captain Marvel just yet but when they do, she'll be absolutely Marvelous. Ultimately, I'd say check it out. It's beautiful, entertaining, and Sam Jackson is always awesome. For a weekend distraction, you can do much worse.

[conalmcstravick]

SAC (Ongoing Bodies): Syndrome de Paris Suite, Conal McStravick, Alexander Kennedy & Simone Hutchinson, CCA Glasgow, 1st - 18th February 2018. The SAC project was initiated as a text-based collaboration between McStravick, Hutchinson and Kennedy and developed into a set of propositions  combining a critique of academicism employing deconstructive feminism, orientalism and post-colonial theory, the clinamen, pataphysics, sexuation and psychoanalysis. These texts formed the basis of a series of performances featuring dancers Rachel Smith, Rob Heaslip and Tom Pritchard, artist Leanne Hopper as well as the artists themselves. These were filmed by the artists and artist Martin Clark in the theatre and artist’s accommodation spaces of CCA Glasgow and Glasgow School of Art library in late 2010 early 2011. The audio re-combined elements of the original notes and further self-authored texts. For the subsequent exhibition at CCA Glasgow moving images were chaptered and played on a random loop, audio was chaptered and was activated by PIR sensors that reacted to the movements of the audience in the space.  Notes for (SAC) Ongoing Bodies: Syndrome de Paris Suite Introduction This work presents an exorcism and a bodying-forth, an invocation and re-imagining of the battered corpse, now exquisite, that is the body after its academic and institutional deconstruction. A dancer appears to disappear, objectifying him/herself before the viewer, disappearing in the role, transcendent, the opposite of acting. In order to examine this situation, the Suite makes reference to Bando Tamasaburo’s kabuki performance (1) as the Heron Maiden (2), Yoko Ono’s Cut Piece (3), and a kimono inspired dress by Kansai Yamamoto (4) found by chance on eBay. The ethical consequences of ‘flirting with the other’ are exposed via principles of Aristotelian and Lacanian logic, and formalised into filmed improvised performances that reference Beckett’s Quad and Dan Graham’s film and video-performances works of the 70s. Furthermore, the work uses japonisme (5) as a metaphor for the institution's colonialising power, with the dancers performing butoh-inspired (6) improvisations in Mackintosh's japoniste library at Glasgow School of Art. This sense of internalised, performed otherness relates to post-Lacanian and Kristevian theories of subjectivity, where we are strangers to ourselves. In revealing this strangeness rather than exploiting it, the institution's eternal thirst for 'new knowledge' is rejected and replaced by immediate realisation and revelation – a kind of gnosis – that is metaphorically acted out in the hikinuki or quick on-stage costume change in kabuki. To 'reveal' in this way complements a Greenbergian call for instantaneity in the modernist artwork countered and re-configured in parallel with Lacan: ‘The time for comprehending can be reduced to the instant of the glance, but this instant can include all the time needed for comprehending.’ (7) or subjecthood defined by Leo Bersani: ‘We are neither present in the world nor absent from it . . the aesthetic subject, while it both produces and is produced by works of art, is a mode of relational being that exceeds the cultural province of art and embodies truths of being. Art diagrams universal relationality.’ (8) In order to express her/himself, each subject must make a leap of madness (Nietzsche) as a leap of faith (Derrida). One must speak as a subject and the subject in order to give the illusion of a particular sovereign subjectivity. This is an impossibility and demonstrates the contingency of our claims to universality (to speak as 'one'). But these claims must be made. All words and therefore actions are generated out of the constitutive lack within language; its failure, Beckett's 'I can't go on, I'll go on...' (9)  What is sought is a stylistics of existence, an awareness and examination of the overlap between ethics and aesthetics, subject and object, which simultaneously generates art objects and artistic agency as unstable but beautiful precipitates. Key thematics and concerns: The Clinamen, Pataphysics and OuLiPo. The concept of the clinamen (10) represents the principle of creation: a hypothetical random swerve of a single atom as it falls amidst a uniform rain of atoms in the cosmos causing a collision and creating matter. (11) In the context of Alfred Jarry's 'pataphysics, the clinamen describes reality not as the rule but as an exception. Pataphysics is Jarry's playful meta-metaphysics and critique of orthodox science which he invented to define alternative approaches to knowledge. It has been described as resting on the truth of contradictions and exceptions. Its inventor was influenced as much by symbolism and the occult as contemporary Victorian scientific exploration. The clinamen became crucial in the theory and practice of this collaborative project. It forged a relation with other research concerning for example sexuality and gender, Aristotle's logic, based on four predicates (universal affirmative, particular affimative, universal negative and particular negative), and the application of these in Lacan's table of sexuation- a diagram used to demonstrate the theorisation of sex as non-biologically defined and language centred. The constellation of these ideas invited a relation to another pataphysical concept - that of syzygy - which chiefly describes planetary opposites but which in relation to language 'represents the rule of prose style, that a word must transfix a momentary conjunction or opposition of meanings'(12). Another component was summoned via our passing interest in Hegel's writings, which anticipated systems theory's emergent property or rather, emergent quality. Indeed, style and therefore the subject as her/his significations can be considered an emergent quality. This concept of an emergent quality returns to the Jarryite adoption of clinamen: emergent quality as exception. This nexus of structural imagery with its constituents' connotations of harmony, potentiality, movement and creation suggested a design for a choreographed performance which engaged with the OuLiPo tradition of using constraints and the clinamen. The Academic Institution – Orientalism, Exoticism, Colonialism. This element within the work visualises a problem with the discourse of the university, namely: the university as an unstoppable colonialising force. This urge – which can be seen as a misplaced and misunderstood rear-guard manifestation of the European Enlightenment – is very real, and relates to the university’s terrible hunger for ‘new knowledge’, for academics to continually find and exploit a dark, virginal, rich seam, and to turn terra incognita (hidden ground) into terra firma (a firm foundation). This careerist approach is to the detriment of Truth and ignores the complex, symbiotic relationship between the dominant ideology and knowledge. Because of this, a clichéd image of exoticism, of ‘the orient’ is superficially attractive and useful. In this sense the work appropriates a misappropriation, in that it lets us understand, or at least expose, a misunderstanding (that there is an ‘other’ waiting to be saved, incorporated and exploited by the benign university). The heightened, theatrical effects that are used in kabuki emphasise and hypostatise this sense of separation from the other, a theoretical ‘distance’ and ‘strangeness’ that we are told we feel in relation to High Art generated by a different, ancient culture. It is perhaps necessary to further stress that within this area of research, particular interest lies in the kabuki tradition of musical theatre and dance. Born out of a series of edicts (threats by the Law voiced and embodied by the Emperor), the de-naturalising effects implicit in kabuki became further emphasised – all female roles had to be played by men (onnagata). In this way, the form kabuki takes today demonstrates how performance and performativity overlap. The performative speech act can be understood as a command to Be, based on the Emperor’s ‘Thou shalt not’; the resulting art form forces us to deal with binary ideas – what is condoned and what is not, the natural and the artificial, the performer and the performed, male and female.

Endnotes: (1) Bando Tamasaburo, contemporary Kabuki performer famed for his onnagata or female impersonation roles. (2) Heron Maiden, 18th Century Kabuki play based on a traditional tale of unrequited love. For more info: http://www.kabuki21.com/sagi_musume.php or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q1MPwD7zCI for performance. (3) 'Cut piece' first performed, 1964 http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3dsvy_yoko-ono-c ut-piece_shortfilms (4) Kansai Yamamoto, most famously designed kabuki inspired costume for David Bowie in the early 1970s. (5) Japonism or Japonisme: an art historical term applied to Western art that references the art of Japan. The term first appeared in 1872. (6) Buto or Butoh: a contemporary expressionist dance form that originated in postwar Japan, first called Ankoku Butoh, or Dance of Utter Darkness. (7) Jacques Lacan, 'Logical Time and the Assertion of Anticipated Certainty', Cahiers d’art, 1945. (8) Leo Bersani, 'Psychoanalysis and the Aesthetic Subject' Is The Rectum A Grave & Other Essays, University of Chicago press, 2010. (9) Samuel Beckett, The Beckett Trilogy: Molloy, Malone Dies, The Unnamable, Picador, 1976, London. Page 382 (10) In literature, the clinamen gained currency in the twentieth century with a number of writers most significantly OuLiPo ('Ouvroir de Litterature Potentielle', approximately, 'Workshop for Potential Literature'.). Inspired by Alfred Jarry's pataphysics the Oulipo group sought to advance new methods of writing, employing constraints to their writing processes, sometimes deliberately deviating from their chosen constraint as a specific way of invoking the clinamen. Yet the group insist that a writer can only use the clinamen as long as it is not needed - that its use can only be an aesthetic one. Italo Calvino, a celebrated Oulipian, felt that the clinamen played a crucial role in the theory and practice of the group. (11) Lucretius' poem De Rerum Natura (1 BC) concerns Epicurus' cosmology. Epicurus (341–270 BC) believed in free will and used the clinamen as hypothetical evidence for this. Quantum physics informs us now that atoms do move and collide unpredictably in the presence of other atoms – albeit perpetually rather than occasionally as Epicurus thought. However, the idea of using this atomic evidence as proof of free will clearly encounters problems since on a macro level, large bodies of matter do move in predictable and determinable paths. (12) Roger Shattuck, 'Introduction' in Alfred Jarry's Exploits and opinions of Dr. Faustroll Pataphysician: A neo-scientific novel Translated and Annotated by Simon Watson Taylor. Exact Change, Boston: 1996. p. xvii

[wp-yahoo-style-1042-yahoopa-blog]

Why Emilia Clarke Shouldn’t Have to Justify Her ‘Game of Thrones’ Nude Scenes

  Photo: Getty Images

Emilia Clarke is done defending her Game of Thrones nude scenes. But the actress, who has never been shy when it comes to talking about gender equality, is only getting started, when it comes to promoting acts of everyday feminism.

Clarke, who is guest editing the Huffington Post U.K.’s month-long project “All Women Everywhere,” in celebration of International Women’s Day, penned a painfully honest essay about her experiences with gender equality and life in the GoT spotlight.

Women's day?! HELLS TO THE YEAH. I had the honour of guest editing the Huffington post Women's Day edition, and here it is��� http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/emilia-clarke/emilia-clarke-feminism_b_15076204.html?1488876720& http://huff.to/2mh5qZV #neverunderestimatethegirlballers ???????????????? #AllWomenEverywhere #IWD2017 Link in bio ????????

A post shared by @emilia_clarke on Mar 8, 2017 at 1:43am PST

“If you’ve watched Game of Thrones then, spoiler, you will have seen me in the nude. There are plenty of ways in which people want me to respond to questions about this fact. And plenty of reasons why I do not feel the need to justify myself,” wrote the actress, who has gracefully fielded questions and responded to arguably inappropriate off-the-cuff comments about her oft-naked character for years. Instead, she would like to turn the focus toward “stand[ing] up as women in our ordinary everyday lives” and putting a bit more emphasis on a little thing called kindness, because “being kind is showing someone that they are seen and heard, and that they do indeed matter. And that’s sexy.”

Admitting that she sometimes feels “like a guilty feminist” for not doing enough, Clarke explains that she’s speaking out now because “as my best friend would put it, I am a girl-boss, and I am in an industry where if I speak out against inequality, I have a platform and might be lucky enough to have a chance of being heard.” And those revealing roles? They’ve “given me an insight into what it feels like to be a woman who stands up to inequality and hate and stands out as a feminist.” 

“With my voice, I hope the feminist mindset my family instilled in me becomes the new normal and boys and girls are raised to know they are equal,” the actress wrote in conclusion, and praise for her statements is starting to roll in on Twitter.

@WatchersOTWall love Emilia so much. Hope people take her words to heart ????

— Vanessa Cole (@vkcoleartist) March 8, 2017

this is so important. thank you @emiliaclarke ???? #InternationalWomensDay pic.twitter.com/W1EbHeM20w

— lauren (@thatloveish) March 8, 2017

@HuffPostCanada Beautifully said, Emilia!! ❤️

— Jerry Cutler ???????????????? (@JOLearyCutler) March 8, 2017

But Clarke is by no means the first actress to be asked to justify her nude scenes — or her revealing photo shoots.

Just this week, Beauty and the Beast actress Emma Watson came under fire for a controversial spread in the March issue of Vanity Fair, in which the proud feminist poses braless in a cutout Burberry top. While some took the image as a contradictory anti-feminist statement from the actress — the Bey-hive in particular — Watson responded by using the opportunity to point out just “how many misconceptions and misunderstandings there [are] about what feminism is.”

“Feminism is about giving women choice. Feminism is not a stick with which to beat other women with. It’s about freedom, it’s about liberation, it’s about equality. I really don’t know what my t*ts have to do with it,” she told the BBC before taking to Twitter to clear up any confusion concerning an alleged Beyoncé slight.

This is the part of my 2014 interview with Tavi where we talked about Beyoncé. My words are in bold. pic.twitter.com/Y8vumOeyDT

— Emma Watson (@EmmaWatson) March 7, 2017

@EmmaWatson because people need to stop dragging down people who are actually making an effort! pic.twitter.com/obxKKf16uv

— Tshego Khunou (@xoxo_Tee) March 7, 2017

And you better believe that as the face of the 50 Shades franchise, Dakota Johnson has fielded more than her fair share of inquiries regarding nude scenes. Just last month, the actress explained to Vogue that her nude scenes are purely for realism’s sake: “I don’t want to see someone wearing a bra and underwear in a sex scene. Let’s be honest about it. People are naked when they f***.” Logical, no?

Likewise, Lena Dunham has defended the many nude scenes on her landmark HBO show, Girls, since its inception. “We really do try to show — and people may laugh at this — but we do sex scenes that we think really do push the characters and the plot forward, and that doesn’t feel gratuitous,” she explained back in 2015.

But she has admitted that she doesn’t necessarily find doing them to be easy. “It was one thing when I was doing them on indie film sets,” she told Yahoo that same year, “but when you step onto a set that’s 50 or 100 professional crew members and you take your robe off, there’s a really scary moment where you wonder, ‘Are people going to greet this as what I know it to be, which is an artistic statement, or are people going to turn into something that feels vulgar or unkind?’”

Ultimately, it’s her — and every actress’s — choice, every woman’s choice, to bare her body as she sees fit. As an audience and as a society, let’s try to give them that freedom. Because as Emilia said, “I believe we all have the opportunity to stand up as women in our ordinary everyday lives. I believe that we all have the power to replace hate with justice, open-heartedness and kindness.”

Even if there are bare breasts involved.

Related: Celebs Unite to Empower Women in #EmbraceAmbition Campaign This Lady Gave Up Fashion for Female Reproductive Rights On International Women’s Day, This Powerful Photo Series Shows the Beauty in All Women

Follow us on Instagram, Facebook, and Pinterest for nonstop inspiration delivered fresh to your feed, every day.

[trinamcmichaels01]

Exactly how to Pick Your Perfect Cannabis Seed - farmerslabseeds

When it concerns gathering, among one of the most interesting points you can pick to collect are cannabis seeds. These debatable little beans are just one of the most genetically engineered organic items offered, probably only somewhat behind roses. The remarkable characteristics together with the large variety of different strains of seed readily available make them among the most interesting and most overwhelming collections to begin.

 Among the pursuits some collectors carry out is to try and also discover their best marijuana seed. Every different pressure holds a different set of characteristics which will incorporate to offer you with the perfect seed that matches your taste. Here is what to try to find ...

 THC

 THC stands for 'Tetrahydrocannabinol'. This is the primary psychoactive element found in a totally grown marijuana plant as well as when you look for seeds you will see the THC percentage provided. While your seeds will not include any kind of real THC, every pressure has actually been developed to accurately generate a plant that will have this degree of THC. If you are fortunate enough to live in a nation where expanding marijuana is lawful you will certainly have the ability to evaluate it out. If you are not, you will certainly need to use your best seed having the potential to create specific levels of THC.

 Yield

 Another thing you may like to learn about your cannabis seed is how much marijuana it could make if it were lawful to grow it. Return is generally measured in grams and is worked out by the average yield discovered by the dog breeder. If you like to recognize your seed might produce a high yield this is an attribute you might like to consider Canada.

 Pressure

 Choosing a strain is not practically the vital stats though. You discover rather similar THC and also return degrees on various marijuana seeds so you require to select a pressure you like. A good way to do this is to take a look at ones that have actually won genuine honors for high quality. One of the most respected of which is certainly the High Times Cannabis Cup. Annually they judge what seed bank and what private marijuana seed is the very best of the year. Feminized seeds are probably the most a must at the moment.

 The Michigan Medical Marijuana Act: The First 24-Months

 This short article chronicles the application of the Michigan Medical Cannabis Act, passed through referendum in the 2008 basic political election. As expected, as soon as put on our human tapestry, the Mixed Martial Arts has actually gone through some already-classic judicial analyses, with a solid promise of more to come Weed Seeds.

 The Michigan Legislature passed the Mixed Martial Arts on December 4, 2008, making Michigan the 13th state to enable the cultivation and also belongings of cannabis for medical objectives. The Act pointed out a collection of findings connected to the useful uses marijuana in dealing with nausea, discomfort as well as various other impacts from a range of debilitating clinical problems. The Act also keeps in mind that according to the FBI, 99% of all marijuana possession apprehensions across the country are done pursuant to state, rather than federal regulation. It is essential to note that ownership of the medication remains unlawful under federal regulation.

 The MMA defines a "debilitating clinical condition" as cancer, glaucoma, HIV, hepatitis C, and various other conditions together with other chronic ailments which trigger discomfort as well as nausea. A "main caregiver" is defined as, "a person that is at least 21 years old as well as who has agreed to assist with an individual's clinical use cannabis and also that has never been founded guilty of a felony entailing controlled substances." A "certifying person" is "a person that has been diagnosed by a physician as having a debilitating medical problem."

 The basic auto mechanics of the Act supply that certifying patients and medical care companies (marijuana growers) should have a "registry identification card", provided by the Division of Community Health. Tens of hundreds of applications have actually been processed; numerous thousands stay pending with even more submitted every week; the demand for qualification, for cannabis, is relatively pressing below in Michigan.

 The high need is reasonable. Cardholders are exempt to detain or prosecution for cannabis possession/distribution offered the individual maintains much less than 2.5 ounces of smokeable pot. Care carriers are permitted to preserve approximately 12 plants for each qualified patient; stems, seeds and also unusable origins do not count towards the plant restriction.

 Physicians also have immunity from prosecution relative to their certification of the individual's requirement for the drug, so long as they carry out an analysis of the person's medical history. A genuine physician-patient relationship is called for Weed Seeds.

 Because the UNITED STATE High court determined the case of Conant vs Walters in 2003, medical professionals have actually been able to recommend a patient's use marijuana (but can not suggest pot by putting the referral on a prescription kind). Doctors can likewise make notes regarding their suggestions in the individual's chart and can indicate in support of a patient's medical use cannabis in a court of law. The High court's Conant decision led the way for flow of the MMA.

 Primary care companies might get settlement for their marijuana. Offering marijuana stuff also is allowed under the Mixed Martial Arts, and also such materiel can not be confiscated.

 Individuals merely existing during the use of cannabis for clinical purposes furthermore are exempt to apprehend.

 Audio too great to be real? When marijuana is dispersed to persons other than certifying clients, the registration card is withdrawed, and also the provider undergoes a 2-year felony. Additionally, driving while under the influence of cannabis stays illegal, as does smoking in public. Usage or belongings of pot on school premises or on institution buses stays restricted. And indeed, it remains prohibited to smoke in a jail or a penitentiary, no matter your clinical condition.

 The Act established a short timetable (120-days) for the Division of Community Health and wellness to promulgate laws for the management of the possession/distribution credential. The hold-up in the promulgation of these regulations gave way to complication among police, the public as well as some courts regarding what is lawful and what is illegal.

 As an example, the 2009 Redden instance from Madison Levels included a pair arrested during a drug-raid. The couple had requested accreditation cards prior to their apprehension and also obtained the cards a month after their apprehension. In dismissing the situation brought against the two accuseds, 43rd District Court Robert Turner identified the Mixed Martial Arts as, "the worst piece of regulations I have actually seen in my life", according to the Detroit News. Judge Turner's dismissal was appealed by the Oakland Region District Attorney where it was affirmed in the Oakland Region Circuit Court Weed Seeds.

 Earlier this year, the Michigan Court of Appeals attested Oakland Circuit Court Martha Anderson's reinstatement of the criminal fees against Redden and also Clark. Currently, the accused Madison Levels pair will certainly either need to plead or most likely to trial.

 At the time of the raid on the pair's house, the Oakland Region Sheriff took 1.5 ounces of pot, some nominal money, as well as about 21 little plants. 3 weeks before the raid, each accused had actually sent to a medical certification test with Dr. Eric Eisenbud (deficient up) of Colorado (and of the lately started Hemp as well as Marijuana Foundation Medical Facility) and made an application for a clinical marijuana card pursuant to the MMA. Their cards, however, had actually not been released at the time of the raid.

 At the couple's initial evaluation prior to Court Turner, the prosecutor suggested that: a) the defendants were called for to avoid "medicating" with cannabis while their applications to the State of Michigan's Division of Neighborhood Health were pending; and also b) the offenders did not have an authentic physician-patient connection with Dr. Eisenbud.

 Judge Turner suggested that the Mixed Martial Arts was confusing about what made up an affordable quantity of marijuana. The offenders in this situation were found with an ounce and also a half; the Mixed Martial Arts enables 2.5 ounces.

 Judge Turner made the adhering to ruling:

 Because of that, I think that section 8 qualifies the offenders to a dismissal, although they did not possess the valid medical card, due to the fact that area 8 says if they can reveal the truth that a physician believed that they were likely to receive a restorative advantage, and this doctor demonstrated that. As Well As Dr. Eisenbud is a physician certified by the State of Michigan. Which's the only demand that the law has. You don't have to be any sort of doctor, you just need to be a licensed physician by the State of Canada.

 So, based on that, I find section 8 does apply. And I believe I'm obligated to disregard this issue based upon area 8 of the statute.

 Under the applicable court guidelines, the district attorney appealed the area court termination to the Oakland Circuit Court. Backwards her district court counter-part, Judge Anderson held that Court Turner improperly functioned as a finder of truth in disregarding the situation. Judge Anderson likewise wondered about whether the couple can avail themselves of the Mixed Martial Arts's affirmative defenses at all, because of their purported failings to comply with the arrangements of the act; i.e. keeping the pot set apart as well as locked-up, and also waiting until they received their cards from the Division of Community Health and wellness prior to expanding their pot.

 At the time of the Madison Levels breast, however, the couple can not have gotten cannabis cards due to the fact that the DCH had actually not begun releasing the cards. To day, practically 30,000 certifications have actually been released.

 In their September 2010 opinion affirming Court Martha Anderson, the Court of Appeals held that the MMA's affirmative defenses were readily available to accuseds despite the fact that they did not have their cards at the time their pot was confiscated. The Court of Appeals held versus defendants, nevertheless, on the basis that, at the time of their preliminary exam in district court, their affirmative protection under the MMA was incomplete as well as therefore developed truth questions U.S.A..

 The Court located the following reality problems to be unsolved at the final thought of the exam: the bona fides of the physician-patient relationship; whether the amount of marijuana discovered in the residence was "affordable" under the Act; and whether the cannabis was being used by accuseds for palliative purposes, as required by the Act Weed Seeds.

 The most intriguing aspect of the Court of Appeals' Redden decision is the scathing agreeing viewpoint of Judge Peter D. O'Connell. Judge O'Connell wrote separately due to the fact that he would certainly have much more narrowly tailored the affirmative defenses offered in the Mixed Martial Arts, and since he wanted to "elaborate" on some of the general discussion of the Act stated in the briefs and at oral disagreement.

 Specify he did. Judge O'Connell's 30-page point of view very first notes that the belongings, distribution and also manufacture of cannabis stays a government criminal activity and additional notes that Congress has specifically discovered the plant to have "no acceptable medical usages."

 In what will definitely end up being a timeless line from his point of view, Court O'Connell writes, "I will certainly attempt to cut through the haze surrounding this regulations." The judge is skeptical that folks are actually using pot to "medicate" and believes that they are utilizing the plant for recreational functions.

 He likewise bears in mind of the low quality of the regulations to the extent that it conflicts with various other provisions set forth in the Health and wellness Code.

 Court O'Connell next takes an excursion de force through the legislative background of the MMA. Here, we discover that the act was based on version regulations proposed by powerbrokers referred to as the Cannabis Plan Project of Washington D.C. The group advances both the medical and leisure uses cannabis.

 " Confusion", as well as great deals of it, is just how Court O'Connell views the Mixed Martial Arts. In one of the many explanations to his opinion, the Court advises against all cannabis usage up until the score is resolved, once and for all, by the Michigan Supreme Court:

 Up Until our Supreme Court provides a final comprehensive analysis of this act, it would certainly be prudent for the people of this state to avoid all use of marijuana if they do not wish to run the risk of breaking state regulation. I once more issue a stern warning to all: please do not try to translate this act on your very own. Reviewing this act is similar to participating in the Triwizard Competition explained in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire: the labyrinth that is this statute is so complicated that the outcome will just be understood once the High court has had a possibility to evaluate and also eliminate the haze from this act USA.

 Euan Abercrombie, 1st year pupil at the Hogwarts college would possibly remark; "Wow".

 For their part, the criminal defense bar, commenting through listserv, have actually generally gone wild over the agreeing point of view, with its numerous web site referrals and photos of marijuana ads. The consensus among the protection bar, nonetheless, is that the bulk viewpoint is proper and that Judge Anderson, at the end of the day, got it right; Redden was not the cleanest instance to dismiss under the Act Canada.

 The Oakland Region Constable as well as Prosecutor appropriately anticipated the Court of Appeals' September decision. A few weeks prior to the Redden choice, they conducted a collection of dispensary raids, ruffling tons of plumes along the road Weed Seeds.

 Naturally, an application for leave to charm has actually been filed with the Michigan Supreme Court.

 For extra procedural advice, we have prepared a lawful guide for the MMA for those looking for to use cannabis for legitimate palliative objectives under the Act. Bear in mind, nevertheless, that a minimum of one appellate jurist would certainly have individuals managing persistent "discomfort" with prescription medications till the medical cannabis mess is figured out by our Supreme Court.

 Redden is not the only instance causing some MMA consternation. Rodney Koon's case has actually received prestige. Koon was founded guilty of a misdemeanor due to the fact that he confessed to authorities that he used marijuana to "medicate" previously in the day that he was pulled-over by the authorities. Koon additionally admitted to taking in a beer, however his blood alcohol was within lawful restrictions. Without sufficient funds to appeal, Koon is stuck with his conviction, even though he had a pot card at the time of his arrest.

 Ordinances have sprung-up across the state to trim the extent of the Mixed Martial Arts. Bloomfield Hills, for instance, passed an ordinance in October needing card-carrying certified clinical marijuana customers to register with the Bloomfield Town Authorities Division. The statute likewise requires the submission of a type to the police revealing the "person's" vehicle drivers certify number as well as date of birth, whether the individual possesses or rents their home, and also identifying how many various other patients share their house.

 Furthermore, the statute limits the number of clinical marijuana people that can live at one address and also prohibits growing clinical cannabis anywhere in Bloomfield Area. Infraction of the regulation is a 93-day misdemeanor lugging a $500 fine.

 Bloomfield Hills is among several towns that have actually passed statutes that restrict the provisions of the Medical Cannabis Act, criminalize conduct accredited by the Act, or both.

 Now the statute is the topic of a lawsuit submitted against the territory by two smart [their "customers" are John and Jane Doe] proficient criminal defense lawyer: Tom Loeb as well as Neil Rockind. The claim, unquestionably heading to the Michigan High Court, does not look for cash damages but instead, declarative and injunctive alleviation UNITED STATES.

 Town by area, the MMA is coming under attack for a glaring flaw: it is a sham for leisure pot customers. Yes, there are legitimate clinical cannabis customers available, in spades, for whom the Mixed Martial Arts was created to aid. There are also many "people" whose medical records were examined with a passing look by a physician more thinking about the high-volume evaluation charges than in identifying whether the individual has a genuine persistent medical condition of the sort required by the MMA. The LawBlogger asks yourself how many certified customers, among the 10s of hundreds of backlogged applicants, are under the age of 25; or are university youngsters whose only persistent condition is their desire to event down Canada.

 As these lawful difficulties grind with the court system over the following two or 3 years, the Mixed Martial Arts will certainly undergo death-by-ordinance on a township-by-township basis. Lawyer Rockind as well as Loeb mentioned in their interview announcing their lawsuit that the regulation in Bloomfield Hills can not stand to the level it negates a legitimate Michigan regulation Weed Seeds.

 While it might not be the best example of tightly prepared regulation; while it most certainly deals with troubles of perception/deception, the Mixed Martial Arts is a legitimate state regulation. The appellate courts will certainly have no option however to revoke ordinances that limit the scope of the Act, or criminalize it's legitimate functions.

 This past autumn, the recent election was a set-back for dynamic marijuana regulations. California's Suggestion 19 lost by a ballot of 56% to 44%. If successful, the proposed regulation would certainly have been the very first in the nation to legalize the leisure use marijuana.

 In Arizona, the clinical marijuana proposition lost.

 In California, the pot effort shed due to the fact that too few citizens under age 26 turned out and also moderate citizens turned down the initiative. Current violence with Mexican medicine gangs in both California and also Arizona did not aid either effort.

 Combined messages drift around the issue here in Michigan. Recently, a substantial pot-expo set up for the Pontiac Silverdome, billed as the biggest pot-party on the planet, was canceled at the last minute.

 All this raises the questions: do we actually require to legalize pot? Is ours a pot-smoking nation? Does marijuana have genuine palliative homes?

 Among the significant problems of perception with medical cannabis laws is that individuals are just experiencing the administrative steps to obtain "clinically" accredited to utilize pot, but are smoking on an entertainment basis.

 No great results a regulation that sets demands that are perceived as a farce. It would certainly probably be far better to legalize cannabis outright, then regulate its manufacturing, sale, as well as circulation.

 The golden state was truly eagerly anticipating billions in pot-derived state earnings. Below in Michigan, there is confusion regarding who can lawfully grow pot and just how it should be expanded and dispersed to "clients". In Arizona, the question is too close to call 3-days after the mid-term political elections.

 So then, what are they smoking? That's what Detroit-based Cannabis Guidance lawyer Matthew Abel is asking of the Michigan Us Senate Judiciary Committee, who satisfied previously this year, in January, in order to talk about a package of bills which would change the general public wellness code so that clinical marijuana must be given by pharmacologists, as well as to identify medical cannabis as a timetable 2 dangerous drug USA.

 " It appears that if the legislature ever before passed these costs, they would certainly be in problem with the clinical cannabis law," Abel stated. "So they would certainly require a 3/4 vote to supersede the law, and also you know that they can't also obtain 3/4 of the legislature to settle on lunch, not to mention this."

 Southfield-based lawyer Michael Komorn, who also works as the treasurer for the Michigan Medical Marijuana Organization, stated the costs are similar to bills introduced last year; in 2014, the bills which additionally would certainly have allowed for 10 marijuana expanding facilities to be associated with a drug store, obtained no traction.

 This year's manifestation of the expenses would essentially make all production of clinical cannabis illegal, though use would still be protected by regulation, Komorn said.

 " It's like the stamp act, arcane and also with no understanding of what truly is going on with client demands," Komorn stated. "Profits, this is an attempt to rescind the Michigan clinical marijuana act."

 It's impossible, Abel said, to need dispensing of medical marijuana with pharmacies.

 " They do not have a supply, and also no chance to obtain it. There's just no other way for them to do it," Abel stated.

 Still, he's resting easy with the concept that the costs are going nowhere, and also are actually much more concerning grandstanding for political popularity than they have to do with the Michigan clinical cannabis law.

 Cannabis at Home, in the Automobile, and also the Workplace

 The movement for the total legalization of marijuana continues to go through a number of stages, from outright enforcement (Texas), to decriminalization (several states), to clinical usage just (California as well as others), to hands-off, do-what-you-want (freshly developed in Colorado and Washington.) We understand from long experience how inadequately points turn out whenever the government steps in and restricts anything that changes the mood, satisfaction, or sobriety of its people Canada.

 When reviewing the social effect of marijuana versus various other stimulants, an usual concern emerges: "Would you instead live next door to 100 pot cigarette smokers or one meth individual?" As well as everyone that lives beside the marijuana fanatic knows why he is always the most effective choice. Pot Guy is stereotypically mellow as well as peaceful, while Meth Guy is disruptive, flustered, paranoid, loud, and also intrusive of other people's requirement for tranquility. Weed individuals go to rest; tweaker individuals keep you from obtaining any kind of. It's tough to get some rest when your neighbor is servicing his transmission or sawing steel pipes at 3:00 a.m., Lynyrd Skynyrd music blasting away.

 As such, pro-marijuana reform teams commonly talk with the family member threats of alcohol, in terms of the overall health and wellness threats and also behavior issues, when contrasted to their medicine of selection. Alcohol is labeled by many medical professionals as a whole-body poisonous substance (a flavored one, yet damaging nonetheless). It impacts every body organ, starting with the liver and brain, in addition to the kidneys, bladder, belly, as well as pancreas. The accompanying sinister behavioral concerns connected to alcohol abuse are well-noted and also tragic, ranging from homicide, suicide, and also sexual assault to residential violence, youngster misuse, as well as arbitrary or targeted attacks on people that went across the fierce enthusiast's course.

 Hefty marijuana smokers certainly can not overlook the influence on the human brain as well as body, from anxiety or memory issues, to lung damages to numerous forms of cancer. (Inhaling cancer causing smoke is not the very best means to take in anything, therefore the development towards dosing with marijuana-flavored foods, candy, sauces, and so on).

 When I teach my work environment physical violence avoidance programs, we discuss the medicines that tend to be a disinhibitor for violence, with alcohol being Primary. When people ask me if cannabis individuals can end up being terrible, before I can answer, some wag in the group typically screams, "Not unless they run out!" All of us laugh, we agree that marijuana is not a medicine that is linked to violence, like alcohol as well as stimulants, and also we go on Canada.

 Yet while pro-pot individuals can take the high road (no word play here meant) over their alcohol-using equivalents when it pertains to physical violence, or getting behind the wheel of a cars and truck loaded on either, the argument as to just how much is excessive is simple to measure for one and also not so for the other.

 While the national criterion for driving while intoxicated is a blood alcohol level of at least.08, there is no set standard for marijuana use and driving. This is the disagreement the pro-marijuana entrance hall has yet to master. Just how much THC-CCOH (a metabolite in cannabis) in a vehicle driver is excessive - enough to cause impairment - or too little to make a difference? Some clinical studies are considering how many nanograms per milliliter of THC-CCOH in the vehicle driver's urine can recommend a criterion for disability, yet so far this dimension is also inaccurate due to the fact that it does not consider the individual's driving capability.

Look At Here Now