#reevaluate your concept of race | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

simkjrs · 3 years ago

Note

How about Kusuke for that ask meme? Would love to hear more of your thoughts on that little freak 😊

favorite thing about them

im kind of obsessed with his misanthropic mad scientist ways. theres nothing funnier about kuusuke than his complete lack of consideration for the happiness or quality of life for the rest of the human race. just look at him <3

least favorite thing about them

i hate all the incest jokes baked into his character. asou shuuichi had a perfectly interesting and compelling guy without that so why did he have to ruin it.

aside from that i think its really sad when he regularly invades saiki's privacy & bodily autonomy (such as adding a trigger to saiki's second limiter device without telling him. someone introduce kuusuke to the concept of informed consent please). i do think that this is one of the most interesting points of conflict between him and saiki tho so i wish asou shuuichi did something more with it where saiki gets a character arc learning how to assert his boundaries after living his whole life unable to respect others boundaries (due to x ray and mindreading) and without others respecting his (see: his dad and kuusuke)

favorite line

brOTP

i <3 saiki and kuusukes fucked beyond all repair brothers relationship i love how they care about each other but this fixes nothing and makes everything worse. its so interesting how they shaped each other growing up, and how despite resenting each other they also give each other things they cant get from anyone else -- kuusuke finding a "playmate" who can challenge him and stimulate his creativity, kusuo having someone he can rely on when it comes down to a crisis (such as his limiter breaking or needing to find a way to stop japan from being destroyed by a super volcano explosion).

of course, the fact that kuusuke cant be relied on in any other circumstance is also what makes the relationship interesting i think. like if kuusuke isn't helping saiki fix a problem, then he's the one causing all of saiki's problems. i really wish that we got more exploring their relationship.

that said it's really hard to enjoy them whole heartedly when all the incest jokes keep sneaking in. sorry i keep bringing this up but i really do hate them so much. like either commit to the incest/harrassment plotline and do your best to thoughtfully & respectfully portray the consequences of that trauma, or just leave it out. dont make it into a joke LOL ... literally why does anyone ever think this is funny

OTP

kuusuke x his pure & innocent disregard for humanity <3

nOTP

i see people shipping him with teruhashi makoto sometimes and its like ... why ... would you think that putting two creeps together would fix anything about them. they wouldnt make each other worse in a fun or interesting way. and they wouldnt even be funny

random headcanon

i think that kuusuke stopped resenting saiki shortly after he left home to go to cambridge because suddenly he was the smartest most genius most admired person in the room again but it was so boring because no one could challenge him and there was nothing to surpass. since life felt very boring & meaningless like this, i think that made him reevaluate his relationship with his brother and he realized that as much as it frustrated him to lose it made him happy to have a goal to always strive for. so i think after that, his ill will towards saiki mostly disappeared ... though he still has deadly serious competitive intent.

that said i think saiki never realized kuusuke's change of heart because kuusuke invented the telepathy canceler. and i think kuusuke wasnt interested in correcting saiki about how he felt now, and i think kuusuke didnt give much (if any) consideration to how it would make saiki feel to keep living under the misconception that his brother still hated him but had simply found a way to hide his plotting, forever. in conclusion: kuusuke is kind of the worst. LOL

unpopular opinion

ive already said all my unpopular opinions. my extremely niche opinion is that if saiki kuusuke and enoshima junko were born into the same world they would perfectly cancel each other out because what they both wanted was to fulfill their boredom and what they both did to do that was raise the stakes on other people until they managed to stop them (or didnt). kuusuke and junko would become perfect rivals. they would be like bbc sherlock and moriarty if they were high schoolers. they would be like L and light if L was completely amoral and just devote to winning the case for the sake of winning, and light was also completely amoral and just killing people to see what would happen. and they would be exactly like this post

song i associate with them

HMM i don't really have one. if i had to pick one... primadonna by marina. LOL

favorite picture of them

i cant pick one so you get three.

#ask #ask game #long post

74 notes · View notes

keepingupwithpotters · 4 years ago

Text

come swim in my ocean

For @efkgirldetective ‘s second week of summer of jily 🌊🌊🌊 with some minor wolfstar thrown in there

swimming with friends + today we're younger than we're ever gonna be (✨vibes✨)

Lily didn’t think they would actually do it.

Sure, it was a fun concept to joke about with your friends, but that’s all it was supposed to be — a dare everybody laughs at but does not try to execute.

She tries to gauge whether it’s too late to chicken out without losing her dignity. She can hear clothes hitting the sand as they’re thrown over carelessly between laughter.

Welp. No turning back now.

She realizes her mistake when she’s the only one left standing with clothes on.

“Well, c’mon Evans. This was your brilliant plan.”

“A plan that made me reevaluate all my previous assessments of you. Who knew Evans had it in her?” She can’t see his face in the dark, but she knows Sirius just winked at her.

She pathetically tries one more time to bring them back from this terrible decision. “You know, I’m starting to think this isn’t such a good idea after all.”

“Ah, come off it Lily,” Marlene yells from… somewhere. “What? You can talk the talk but won’t strip for the walk?”

“It’s not the skinny-dipping part that’s the problem,” she insists unconvincingly, “it’s the night part. The water is probably freezing right now.”

“I’m happy to do this with you again in the morning, Evans.” She tries to resist the usual urge of looking at James when he talks. “But if that’s your only excuse, the water is just fine.”

Peter helpfully flicks some water to Lily to prove James’ point.

Damn it. The water is actually rather nice.

Feeling ganged up on, she sighs deeply to show her displeasure with the turn of events, and starts to work on her clothes quickly. She won’t give them the satisfaction of turning her back while doing it though or acknowledge Mary’s loud whoop – which she shouted in the wrong direction.

Finally out of her last piece of clothing, she grabs the closest hand she can find, and tugs on it once before running into the water.

The loud splashing they make alerts the others to their new location. One by one they come into the sea, sometimes with shrieks and sometimes with swears.

Her companion laughs when the last two dark figures dip into the water as well, it was Remus after all, and turns to her general direction. “I gotta hand it to you, Lily. You’re really committed to cause maximum damage to James’ brain.”

Before Lily can answer him, they are interrupted by Sirius’ loud bellowing, “Wherefore art thou, Moony? Tell that red headed wench it’s not nice to steal my boyfriend for herself.”

“Tell it to the wench yourself,” Lily shouts back before realizing her mistake. Now located by the others, loud splashes fill her ear from everywhere as they all swim to their direction. She makes an honorable attempt to escape with Remus before giving up, not feeling ready for a swimming race with five people on their tail.

James and Sirius are the first ones to reach them, because of course they are, and she leaves Remus to his boyfriend before Sirius starts yelling more Shakespeare quotes. She is just about to swim towards Mary and Marlene to meet them halfway when a hand on her ankle stops her.

“You’re not cruel enough to leave me alone with them when they are naked, are you Evans?”

“Hate to break it to you but I’m very much naked as well, Potter,” she grins cheekily.

“Oh, believe me, I’m aware of that.”

She curses the new moon once more for although providing a very nice opportunity to look at the stars, doesn’t let her see James’ expression.

She can hear the girls catching up to them slowly with Peter not far behind. “Let me save you then, Potter. Are you up for a little swimming?”

Not waiting for his answer, which she can only guess is an enthusiastic nod, she starts to swim away from the upcoming party, knowing he’ll follow.

They are careful not to go deeper, only sideways, until they leave their friends’ earshot. With an unspoken agreement they stop, Lily finally allowing herself to gaze at the sky. She assumes that’s what James is doing too until he interrupts her thoughts.

“I’d hoped it would be brighter.”

She doesn’t answer him, her silence prompting James to explain himself. “The starlight, I mean. Don’t get me wrong, it's beautiful, but it’s not the scenery I want to be looking at right now.”

“Yeah, it’s jarring not to see your face when you’re speaking. Who knows how idiotic you actually look right now?”

James takes her right hand without speaking, bringing it to the edge of his brow. She doesn’t understand what he’s doing until he passes it over the slight lines of his forehead – he's letting her feel his facial expression.

Emboldened by his explicit permission, she lets her fingers rake through the hairs that have stuck on his forehead with water, combing them back with care. She follows the line of his brows, paying special attention to smooth the furrow in between. Her fingers fall dawn to his nose next, and it feels like his breathing had stopped a long time ago. She lovingly touches the cheekbones, wiping drops of water from them slowly. Careful not to skip a line, she trails the arch until she reaches his jaw, feeling it tense and ripple beneath her hand. When her thumb finally touches his lips, she finds them slightly open, just like how she envisioned, and she swears neither of them are breathing in that moment.

But Lily doesn’t want to stop there. She didn’t get James naked to touch his face. She lowers her hand.

If he had stopped breathing before, he certainly starts back when he gasps as her hand passes over his neck. She adds her other hand to grip both of his shoulders, their feet touching every once in a while as they try to stay afloat by just kicking them back and forward. That’s when she realizes James is not using his arms either, standing stock still, afraid to move.

Feeling bolder than ever, she glides her hand until she reaches his, placing it somewhere above her waist, sliding it upwards to encourage him. He practically chokes.

She goes back to outlining his collarbones with her fingers, feeling him shiver underneath her. Or is that her shivering when he slightly caresses the skin over her ribs? She doesn’t know where she ends and he starts under the water.

Which is why she doesn’t react immediately when she feels something touching her foot. A head emerges out of the sea, causing both of them to splash apart. She doesn’t see who it is, but the devilish voice tells her it’s Mary soon enough.

“Oi, lovebirds, pack it up. We’re going back to the house, and we’re leaving no man behind.”

More splashing comes behind Mary, causing all heads to turn that way. “Peter and I lost the water fight, pulling the metaphorical short stick in a sense.”

Peter finally reaches them, and they wait for him to stop his wheezing. “Sirius wanted me to tell you that he and Remus have dibs on the shower first because they are a superior couple who can keep it in their pants while swimming with friends.” An uncomfortable beat. “His words.”

They swim back to the shore soon after that, but she can still hear James grumbling about what pants as they make good use of their time waiting for their turn to shower.

#summerofjily #jily #jily fic #lily evans #james potter #james x lily #minor wolfstar #jily fanfiction #senem writes #i'd like to thank daddy communism for helping me finish my final paper in time to post this today

148 notes · View notes

blind-rats · 4 years ago

Text

The Rise & Fall of Joss Whedon; the Myth of the Hollywood Feminist Hero

By Kelly Faircloth

“I hate ‘feminist.’ Is this a good time to bring that up?” Joss Whedon asked. He paused knowingly, waiting for the laughs he knew would come at the creator of Buffy the Vampire Slayer making such a statement.

It was 2013, and Whedon was onstage at a fundraiser for Equality Now, a human rights organization dedicated to legal equality for women. Though Buffy had been off the air for more than a decade, its legacy still loomed large; Whedon was widely respected as a man with a predilection for making science fiction with strong women for protagonists. Whedon went on to outline why, precisely, he hated the term: “You can’t be born an ‘ist,’” he argued, therefore, “‘feminist’ includes the idea that believing men and women to be equal, believing all people to be people, is not a natural state, that we don’t emerge assuming that everybody in the human race is a human, that the idea of equality is just an idea that’s imposed on us.”

The speech was widely praised and helped cement his pop-cultural reputation as a feminist, in an era that was very keen on celebrity feminists. But it was also, in retrospect, perhaps the high water mark for Whedon’s ability to claim the title, and now, almost a decade later, that reputation is finally in tatters, prompting a reevaluation of not just Whedon’s work, but the narrative he sold about himself.

In July 2020, actor Ray Fisher accused Whedon of being “gross, abusive, unprofessional, and completely unacceptable” on the Justice League set when Whedon took over for Zach Synder as director to finish the project. Charisma Carpenter then described her own experiences with Whedon in a long post to Twitter, hashtagged #IStandWithRayFisher.

On Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel, Carpenter played Cordelia, a popular character who morphed from snob to hero—one of those strong female characters that made Whedon’s feminist reputation—before being unceremoniously written off the show in a plot that saw her thrust into a coma after getting pregnant with a demon. For years, fans have suspected that her disappearance was related to her real-life pregnancy. In her statement, Carpenter appeared to confirm the rumors. “Joss Whedon abused his power on numerous occasions while working on the sets of ‘Buffy the Vampire Slayer’ and ‘Angel,’” she wrote, describing Fisher’s firing as the last straw that inspired her to go public.

Buffy was a landmark of late 1990s popular culture, beloved by many a burgeoning feminist, grad student, gender studies professor, and television critic for the heroine at the heart of the show, the beautiful blonde girl who balanced monster-killing with high school homework alongside ancillary characters like the shy, geeky Willow. Buffy was very nearly one of a kind, an icon of her era who spawned a generation of leather-pants-wearing urban fantasy badasses and women action heroes.

Buffy was so beloved, in fact, that she earned Whedon a similarly privileged place in fans’ hearts and a broader reputation as a man who championed empowered women characters. In the desert of late ’90s and early 2000s popular culture, Whedon was heralded as that rarest of birds—the feminist Hollywood man. For many, he was an example of what more equitable storytelling might look like, a model for how to create compelling women protagonists who were also very, very fun to watch. But Carpenter’s accusations appear to have finally imploded that particular bit of branding, revealing a different reality behind the scenes and prompting a reevaluation of the entire arc of Whedon’s career: who he was and what he was selling all along.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer premiered March 1997, midseason, on The WB, a two-year-old network targeting teens with shows like 7th Heaven. Its beginnings were not necessarily auspicious; it was a reboot of a not-particularly-blockbuster 1992 movie written by third-generation screenwriter Joss Whedon. (His grandfather wrote for The Donna Reed Show; his father wrote for Golden Girls.) The show followed the trials of a stereotypical teenage California girl who moved to a new town and a new school after her parents’ divorce—only, in a deliberate inversion of horror tropes, the entire town sat on top of the entrance to Hell and hence was overrun with demons. Buffy was a slayer, a young woman with the power and immense responsibility to fight them. After the movie turned out very differently than Whedon had originally envisioned, the show was a chance for a do-over, more of a Valley girl comedy than serious horror.

It was layered, it was campy, it was ironic and self-aware. It looked like it belonged on the WB rather than one of the bigger broadcast networks, unlike the slickly produced prestige TV that would follow a few years later. Buffy didn’t fixate on the gory glory of killing vampires—really, the monsters were metaphors for the entire experience of adolescence, in all its complicated misery. Almost immediately, a broad cross-section of viewers responded enthusiastically. Critics loved it, and it would be hugely influential on Whedon’s colleagues in television; many argue that it broke ground in terms of what you could do with a television show in terms of serialized storytelling, setting the stage for the modern TV era. Academics took it up, with the show attracting a tremendous amount of attention and discussion.

In 2002, the New York Times covered the first academic conference dedicated to the show. The organizer called Buffy “a tremendously rich text,” hence the flood of papers with titles like “Pain as Bright as Steel: The Monomyth and Light in ‘Buffy the Vampire Slayer,’” which only gathered speed as the years passed. And while it was never the highest-rated show on television, it attracted an ardent core of fans.

But what stood out the most was the show’s protagonist: a young woman who stereotypically would have been a monster movie victim, with the script flipped: instead of screaming and swooning, she staked the vampires. This was deliberate, the core conceit of the concept, as Whedon said in many, many interviews. The helpless horror movie girl killed in the dark alley instead walks out victorious. He told Time in 1997 that the concept was born from the thought, “I would love to see a movie in which a blond wanders into a dark alley, takes care of herself and deploys her powers.” In Whedon’s framing, it was particularly important that it was a woman who walked out of that alley. He told another publication in 2002 that “the very first mission statement of the show” was “the joy of female power: having it, using it, sharing it.”

In 2021, when seemingly every new streaming property with a woman as its central character makes some half-baked claim to feminism, it’s easy to forget just how much Buffy stood out among its against its contemporaries. Action movies—with exceptions like Alien’s Ripley and Terminator 2's Sarah Conner—were ruled by hulking tough guys with macho swagger. When women appeared on screen opposite vampires, their primary job was to expose long, lovely, vulnerable necks. Stories and characters that bucked these larger currents inspired intense devotion, from Angela Chase of My So-Called Life to Dana Scully of The X-Files.

The broader landscape, too, was dismal. It was the conflicted era of girl power, a concept that sprang up in the wake of the successes of the second-wave feminist movement and the backlash that followed. Young women were constantly exposed to you-can-do-it messaging that juxtaposed uneasily with the reality of the world around them. This was the era of shitty, sexist jokes about every woman who came into Bill Clinton’s orbit and the leering response to the arrival of Britney Spears; Rush Limbaugh was a fairly mainstream figure.

At one point, Buffy competed against Ally McBeal, a show that dedicated an entire episode to a dancing computer-generated baby following around its lawyer main character, her biological clock made zanily literal. Consider this line from a New York Times review of the Buffy’s 1997 premiere: “Given to hot pants and boots that should guarantee the close attention of Humbert Humberts all over America, Buffy is just your average teen-ager, poutily obsessed with clothes and boys.”

Against that background, Buffy was a landmark. Besides the simple fact of its woman protagonist, there were unique plots, like the coming-out story for her friend Willow. An ambivalent 1999 piece in Bitch magazine, even as it explored the show’s tank-top heavy marketing, ultimately concluded, “In the end, it’s precisely this contextual conflict that sets Buffy apart from the rest and makes her an appealing icon. Frustrating as her contradictions may be, annoying as her babe quotient may be, Buffy still offers up a prime-time heroine like no other.”

A 2016 Atlantic piece, adapted from a book excerpt, makes the case that Buffy is perhaps best understood as an icon of third-wave feminism: “In its examination of individual and collective empowerment, its ambiguous politics of racial representation and its willing embrace of contradiction, Buffy is a quintessentially third-wave cultural production.” The show was vested with all the era’s longing for something better than what was available, something different, a champion for a conflicted “post-feminist” era—even if she was an imperfect or somewhat incongruous vessel. It wasn’t just Sunnydale that needed a chosen Slayer, it was an entire generation of women. That fact became intricately intertwined with Whedon himself.

Seemingly every interview involved a discussion of his fondness for stories about strong women. “I’ve always found strong women interesting, because they are not overly represented in the cinema,” he told New York for a 1997 piece that notes he studied both film and “gender and feminist issues” at Wesleyan; “I seem to be the guy for strong action women,’’ he told the New York Times in 1997 with an aw-shucks sort of shrug. ‘’A lot of writers are just terrible when it comes to writing female characters. They forget that they are people.’’ He often cited the influence of his strong, “hardcore feminist” mother, and even suggested that his protagonists served feminist ends in and of themselves: “If I can make teenage boys comfortable with a girl who takes charge of a situation without their knowing that’s what’s happening, it’s better than sitting down and selling them on feminism,” he told Time in 1997.

When he was honored by the organization Equality Now in 2006 for his “outstanding contribution to equality in film and television,” Whedon made his speech an extended riff on the fact that people just kept asking him about it, concluding with the ultimate answer: “Because you’re still asking me that question.” He presented strong women as a simple no-brainer, and he was seemingly always happy to say so, at a time when the entertainment business still seemed ruled by unapologetic misogynists. The internet of the mid-2010s only intensified Whedon’s anointment as a prototypical Hollywood ally, with reporters asking him things like how men could best support the feminist movement.

Whedon’s response: “A guy who goes around saying ‘I’m a feminist’ usually has an agenda that is not feminist. A guy who behaves like one, who actually becomes involved in the movement, generally speaking, you can trust that. And it doesn’t just apply to the action that is activist. It applies to the way they treat the women they work with and they live with and they see on the street.” This remark takes on a great deal of irony in light of Carpenter’s statement.

In recent years, Whedon’s reputation as an ally began to wane. Partly, it was because of the work itself, which revealed more and more cracks as Buffy receded in the rearview mirror. Maybe it all started to sour with Dollhouse, a TV show that imagined Eliza Dushku as a young woman rented out to the rich and powerful, her mind wiped after every assignment, a concept that sat poorly with fans. (Though Whedon, while he was publicly unhappy with how the show had turned out after much push-and-pull with the corporate bosses at Fox, still argued the conceit was “the most pure feminist and empowering statement I’d ever made—somebody building themselves from nothing,” in a 2012 interview with Wired.)

After years of loud disappointment with the TV bosses at Fox on Firefly and Dollhouse, Whedon moved into big-budget Hollywood blockbusters. He helped birth the Marvel-dominated era of movies with his work as director of The Avengers. But his second Avengers movie, Age of Ultron, was heavily criticized for a moment in which Black Widow laid out her personal reproductive history for the Hulk, suggesting her sterilization somehow made her a “monster.” In June 2017, his un-filmed script for a Wonder Woman adaptation leaked, to widespread mockery. The script’s introduction of Diana was almost leering: “To say she is beautiful is almost to miss the point. She is elemental, as natural and wild as the luminous flora surrounding. Her dark hair waterfalls to her shoulders in soft arcs and curls. Her body is curvaceous, but taut as a drawn bow.”

But Whedon’s real fall from grace began in 2017, right before MeToo spurred a cultural reckoning. His ex-wife, Kai Cole, published a piece in The Wrap accusing him of cheating off and on throughout their relationship and calling him a hypocrite:

“Despite understanding, on some level, that what he was doing was wrong, he never conceded the hypocrisy of being out in the world preaching feminist ideals, while at the same time, taking away my right to make choices for my life and my body based on the truth. He deceived me for 15 years, so he could have everything he wanted. I believed, everyone believed, that he was one of the good guys, committed to fighting for women’s rights, committed to our marriage, and to the women he worked with. But I now see how he used his relationship with me as a shield, both during and after our marriage, so no one would question his relationships with other women or scrutinize his writing as anything other than feminist.”

But his reputation was just too strong; the accusation that he didn’t practice what he preached didn’t quite stick. A spokesperson for Whedon told the Wrap: “While this account includes inaccuracies and misrepresentations which can be harmful to their family, Joss is not commenting, out of concern for his children and out of respect for his ex-wife. Many minimized the essay on the basis that adultery doesn’t necessarily make you a bad feminist or erase a legacy. Whedon similarly seemed to shrug off Ray Fisher’s accusations of creating a toxic workplace; instead, Warner Media fired Fisher.

But Carpenter’s statement—which struck right at the heart of his Buffy-based legacy for progressivism—may finally change things. Even at the time, the plotline in which Charisma Carpenter was written off Angel—carrying a demon child that turned her into “Evil Cordelia,” ending the season in a coma, and quite simply never reappearing—was unpopular. Asked about what had happened in a 2009 panel at DragonCon, she said that “my relationship with Joss became strained,” continuing: “We all go through our stuff in general [behind the scenes], and I was going through my stuff, and then I became pregnant. And I guess in his mind, he had a different way of seeing the season go… in the fourth season.”

“I think Joss was, honestly, mad. I think he was mad at me and I say that in a loving way, which is—it’s a very complicated dynamic working for somebody for so many years, and expectations, and also being on a show for eight years, you gotta live your life. And sometimes living your life gets in the way of maybe the creator’s vision for the future. And that becomes conflict, and that was my experience.”

In her statement on Twitter, Carpenter alleged that after Whedon was informed of her pregnancy, he called her into a closed-door meeting and “asked me if I was ‘going to keep it,’ and manipulatively weaponized my womanhood and faith against me.” She added that “he proceeded to attack my character, mock my religious beliefs, accuse me of sabotaging the show, and then unceremoniously fired me following the season once I gave birth.” Carpenter said that he called her fat while she was four months pregnant and scheduled her to work at 1 a.m. while six months pregnant after her doctor had recommended shortening her hours, a move she describes as retaliatory. What Carpenter describes, in other words, is an absolutely textbook case of pregnancy discrimination in the workplace, the type of bullshit the feminist movement exists to fight—at the hands of the man who was for years lauded as a Hollywood feminist for his work on Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel.

Many of Carpenter’s colleagues from Buffy and Angel spoke out in support, including Buffy herself, Sarah Michelle Gellar. “While I am proud to have my name associated with Buffy Summers, I don’t want to be forever associated with the name Joss Whedon,” she said in a statement. Just shy of a decade after that 2013 speech, many of the cast members on the show that put him on that stage are cutting ties.

Whedon garnered a reputation as pop culture’s ultimate feminist man because Buffy did stand out so much, an oasis in a wasteland. But in 2021, the idea of a lone man being responsible for creating women’s stories—one who told the New York Times, “I seem to be the guy for strong action women”—seems like a relic. It’s depressing to consider how many years Hollywood’s first instinct for “strong action women” wasn’t a woman, and to think about what other people could have done with those resources. When Wonder Woman finally reached the screen, to great acclaim, it was with a woman as director.

Besides, Whedon didn’t make Buffy all by himself—many, many women contributed, from the actresses to the writers to the stunt workers, and his reputation grew so large it eclipsed their part in the show’s creation. Even as he preached feminism, Whedon benefitted from one of the oldest, most sexist stereotypes: the man who’s a benevolent, creative genius. And Buffy, too, overshadowed all the other contributors who redefined who could be a hero on television and in speculative fiction, from individual actors like Gillian Anderson to the determined, creative women who wrote science fiction and fantasy over the last several decades to—perhaps most of all—the fans who craved different, better stories. Buffy helped change what you could put on TV, but it didn’t create the desire to see a character like her. It was that desire, as much as Whedon himself, that gave Buffy the Vampire Slayer her power.

#Joss Whedon #Buffy The Vampire Slayer #Ray Fisher #Charisma Carpenter #Feminist

161 notes · View notes

cosmicjoke · 4 years ago

Text

Ah, chapters 113 & 114 of AoT, and I’ve only got one thing to say.

Zeke, am I supposed to be feel sorry for the bitch? Well I DON’T.

No, seriously, fuck this guuuuuuuuy, I know I keep saying it again and again, but God damn, if these two chapters didn’t just solidify my hatred for the bastard.

First of all, he is just... the most whiny, delusional, self-pitying pathetic loser, just... he really is. I feel like a character in a Peanuts comic strip every time he opens his mouth. All I hear is “whaa, whaa, whaa”. And his delusions of grandeur would almost be funny if they weren’t so pathetic.

Here’s the thing, alright, and I’m sorry if I’m going to offend any Zeke fans with what I’m about to say, but too bad, I guess.

Everything out of this shitheads mouth is a lie. And just because he’s convinced himself of his own bullshit doesn’t make the lies coming out of his mouth any more true.

He turns Levi’s fellow soldiers into Titans. He does this without remorse. Don’t try to tell me Zeke felt bad about it. He didn’t. You know how I know he didn’t? Because in his private moments in the immediate aftermath, he mocks Levi over having done it, gloating about his supposed master plan of using Levi’s compassion against him and utilizing it to ensure Levi’s own demise. Zeke’s entire attitude here is sickeningly unbothered, unburdened, uncaring, and smug in the EXTREME. He mocks Levi’s compassion, literally makes fun of it and lambasts it as a pathetic sign of weakness when he says “I know you’re a caring leader. Your soldiers haven’t done anything wrong. They’ve just grown a little bigger. You wouldn’t, say, slice them to pieces over that, would you?”. This is Zeke making fun of the fact, finding AMUSEMENT in the fact that he’s just murdered 30 people who have never done a single thing to him, and reveling in what he thinks is a victory that will lead to Levi’s own death, reveling in having taken advantage of and weaponizing a better man’s kindness and compassion. Zeke is ENJOYING this moment. Just like he enjoyed killing all those soldiers in Shinganshina. And then, the kicker, and this is a particular point about Zeke that just makes me absolutely sick, he pretends to himself as if he didn’t want to do it. He PLAYS at his own regret, saying, “I didn’t want do this either,” and yet in the very next breath, continues to treat what he’s done with grotesque flippancy, saying “Still, how sad... There wasn’t even a battle or skirmish.” Gloating over how easily he’s bested Levi and his men, before going on to sink further into his insane delusions of grandeur, blaming their inability to trust one another on Levi’s inability to “understand”. I’m sorry, Zeke, but no. You didn’t even TRY to help Levi understand, too wrapped up in your own egotistical god-complex to consider it a possibility. ‘Oh, only I could possibly understand, along with Eren, the great task we two special beings have been burdened with. He makes assumptions about Levi’s life, about the kinds of things he’s seen and experienced, and convinces himself that they couldn’t be anything like what Zeke has (which, hilariously, is all wrong, since out of everyone, Levi knows better than anyone else in the SC what it’s like to be treated as a second class citizen). Zeke just assumes Levi couldn’t possibly ever grasp the complexities of the outside world, and so that’s why Zeke didn’t even bother trying to talk to him. Blah, blah, blah. No, Zeke, you didn’t share your stupid ass plan because you wanted to continue to feel special, like you’re the chosen one who gets to decide the fate of an entire race of people. The most hilarious part of this entire sequence is when Zeke is thinking Levi couldn’t ever understand the concept of all the world’s militaries bearing down on Paradis at once, and what that means, couldn’t grasp the urgency of the situation, as if ZEKE HIMSELF isn’t completely fucking responsible for that situation in the first place. Zeke literally engineered it. He created the problem, and now wants to position himself as the savior. He’s just such a loser man. The God damned definition.

And as if all of that wasn’t bad enough, when it turns out Zeke’s plan to take Levi out failed miserably, and Levi comes after his sorry ass like a bat out of hell, Zeke continues to mock Levi, to laugh at what Levi’s just had to do in order to survive and pursue Zeke. He says “Where’d your adorable little men go!? Don’t tell me you killed them all! The poor things!”. Are you fucking serious? Zeke’s behavior here is one of the most sickening things in the entire story, bar none. The way he laughs at Levi here for having to cut down 30 of his friends and comrades, the absolute display of sociopathic glee and disregard for the severe, horrific trauma he’s just caused this man, is honestly shocking. Man, I’m sorry, but anyone who sympathizes with Zeke over Levi after this display maybe needs to reevaluate their moral compass, because it’s damned broken. And just as an aside, Zeke’s cowardly fear of Levi is also pretty damned funny. He’s just such a bitch./

We go from this perverse display of psychopathic megalomania into Zeke’s backstory, and again, I’m sorry if I’m gonna offend any Zeke fans here, but to all of that, I ask, so effing what? Oh, boohoo, Zeke’s mommy and daddy didn’t shower him with praise or spend any time playing catch with him, and somehow, I guess, this is meant to excuse his attempts later in life to commit mass genocide. Poor, poor Zeke. Yes, his childhood was sad, he experienced neglect from his parents for two whole years, was used by them as a pawn for their idiotic plans, and ended up disappointing his father when it turned out he had no real talent. And again I ask, so what? This sort of experience isn’t exactly what one would call unique, or even extreme. There are countless children in the world who go through the exact same thing in various forms. Parents who put too much pressure on their kids to succeed, parents who try living vicariously through their children, parents who make their disappointment known and even punish their children for failing to live up to their expectations (something Zeke’s parents never did, by the way). The point is, this isn’t even what one would classify as extreme hardship. It’s a sad story of a child being neglected and not receiving enough love from his parents. This isn’t to undermine the very real pain one experiences from those things. Not at all. That pain is real and legitimate. But it’s also fairly common and pedestrian, as far as childhood trauma is concerned, and it doesn’t even remotely begin to justify the extreme lengths of megalomaniacal, sociopathic, genocidal tendencies he later displays. Also, Zeke also had his grandparents, who did love him and spent lots of time with him. He had Mr. Ksaver, who played with him and acted as a mentor to him. It wasn’t like Zeke had no one and grew up with zero connections. That’s BS.

Levi calls this bitch on his shit later in chapter 114, as Zeke’s muttering away in his delusions about how he’s “saving everyone”. He asks Zeke “That was your plan? Mercy killings?”. Levi’s asking Zeke here who the hell gave him the right to decide who lives and who dies? Who gave him the right to decide who’s life is WORTH living? When Levi says him getting to die by being eaten by a Titan is pretty merciful, considering he stole the lives of so many of his comrades, Zeke’s reply speaks volumes about just how warped and demented his thinking is, when he says “I stole nothing. I... saved them. Them and the children they would have... I saved them all... from this cruel world.”. He’s literally justifying murdering countless people by trying to redefine that murder as “saving” them. It’s not murder because it saved them from ever having to suffer again! He’s absolving himself here of his sins by casting his actions in not just a favorable light, but trying to sell them as heroic and admirable. He takes no, actual responsibility for what he’s done. He removes himself from that responsibility by pretending he was doing a good thing, an honorable, noble thing, by murdering a whole bunch of people who’d never done jack shit to him. Yippee for Zeke, I guess. He’s the very definition of an ego-maniac, of someone suffering from a messiah complex. He’s insane, and morally depraved. The very fact that he’s the one who comes up with the idea of eradicating the Eldian race by rendering them infertile is only further proof of this. What teenager comes up with a plan to exterminate an entire race of people and thinks it’s a good idea?

Right before he blows himself and Levi up, he screams “I’m hope you’re watching, Mr. Ksaver!”. He’s indulging in his own, fanciful notions of himself as the “chosen one”, as a unique person who alone is capable of delivering humanity to salvation. He’s showing off, asking Mr. Ksaver to watch him as he “saves the world”, because all he cares about, really, is making himself feel special, of fulfilling what he’s deluded himself into believing is his destiny, his right to decide the fate of the world.

And then he almost kills Levi in the process.

I swear, I wish Levi had just chopped his shitty head off right then and there. No one can blame Levi for chopping the bastards legs up like he did, for being so angry. It wasn’t just that Zeke had killed so many of his fellow soldiers by turning them into Titans, or tried to kill Levi by turning them into Titans, it’s also how Zeke laughed about it, and laughed at the pain he’d caused Levi, treating all of it as if it was worth nothing, and then having the unmitigated gall to cast himself as the hero bestowing his benevolent mercy on all. Give me a fucking break.

Fuck you Zeke. I hope you rot in hell, you dumb shit.

Also, fuck you to Floch too. I hate that bastard almost as much.

#attack on titan #shingeki no kyojin #Levi Ackerman #zeke yeager #snk 113 #snk 114 #meta #thoughts

73 notes · View notes

appletee · 3 years ago

Text

all of this is loveliness

More than a mother or a wife

She is the hope that never died

She's both the lover and the life

itself that flourishes under the light

of the sun and the stars in the sky

Nocturnal as she is,

you can't keep her locked by the night

Teach him to keep

on the road his eyes

and out of the gutter his mind

You can't police mother nature

on what she shares and what she hides

On this day for all of us

For my sisters all around

She came dressed in her flowery gown

Now we will dance with the trees

swaying with the gentle breeze

All I smell in the air is ecstasy

With no one around to tell us

what to make of our body

We are human, finally

Not some undignified soul's

measure for dignity

We are human, merely

Not the only ones accountable

to a concept of purity

And these rivers we dive in

Are the tears we were tired of holding

Now without this liquid, we are lighter

Now rid of the salt, we're not bitter

So why withhold from him this freedom?

Why not let him learn to swim

And set him up for a death by drowning?

To whomever decided what I am

Based on if I am a woman or a man

Are all of us not, first and foremost, human?

Are you aware of the potential you're losing

When you try to fit into a mold what was meant to grow and become greater than anyone's ever been?

When we are so different

not by gender, not by race

but by soul and thought process

How do you expect all of us to fit into a norm that is so painfully same?

When it starts to hurt

It's time to choose modern solutions

Over carefully preserved traditions

I swear it all will not go downhill if you take one step different than your ancestors

if you have one thought not effected by your elders

Look around, notice the change

Think again, reevaluate

#happy late #women's day #forgot to post here :D #poem #original poem #my poem #original writing #writing #poetry #poets on tumblr #writers and poets #poetsandwriters #poet aesthetic #female poets #poets and writers

6 notes · View notes

leportraitducadavre · 4 years ago

Note

LOTS to unpack from that last anon but v weird of you to think that 1) women can't be misogynists and 2) that that rant about "woke" feminism...mattered? Do you not think people are extremely disrespectful to female naruto characters because of misogyny? Like. Go on a Reddit thread or a youtube comment section. Misogyny in the Naruto fandom is very real

I just think maybe you need to reevaluate why a mere mention of the existence of misogyny was enough to make you rant about how bad a certain subsect of feminism has become

Hello, I decided to reply to this just before going to work because I wouldn’t have time afterward -and I would be thinking about it all day, so let’s start:

LOTS to unpack from that last anon

Go on, unpack.

but v weird of you to think that 1) women can't be misogynists

Let me re-write what I put in the answer:

Oh -thank you, but truthfully there’re many (if not most) Sakura haters (often Hinata/NH stans) and/or Hinata haters (usually Sakura/SS stans) that are women.

I don’t know if you honestly didn’t read it -or you purposefully ignored it, but I quite literally stated that there are many (if not most) Sakura and Hinata haters that are women -I’m not denying their existence, I’m highlighting it alongside the fact that many of them are fans of the “opposed” female character -which is to say, that most of those fans downgrade a specific female character just to highlight/raise the value of the other.

2) that that rant about "woke" feminism...mattered? Do you not think people are extremely disrespectful to female naruto characters because of misogyny?

Are you -okay, are you new here? Is this your first time on my blog? Have you read any of my posts? I have stated SO many times how misogyny exists both in the Naruto manga and (on a so much bigger scale) in the Naruto fandom that no one asks me about it anymore -because most of my followers know my thoughts on the matter.

Furthermore, many had read the post I linked in the ask you’re referring to -where I speak in much more detail what I think about “Female Empowerment” of the fandom and how it leaves aside a specific group of women. I don’t know if you’re purposefully twisting my words in order to make me look like someone who denies sexism/misogyny when all I did was point out the importance of linking gender issues with economic and race struggles as well. You can’t tackle just one of those spheres without caring for the other -because they’re intrinsically tied in the oppressive system we have nowadays, which ultimately affects particularly WOC.

Like. Go on a Reddit thread or a youtube comment section. Misogyny in the Naruto fandom is very real

Considering I didn’t DENY sexism--

I just think maybe you need to reevaluate why a mere mention of the existence of misogyny was enough to make you rant about how bad a certain subsect of feminism has become

Quick question -why did you cross “a certain subject of” when it’s an important aspect of my answer? Why are you denying that specific part of any relevance and making it look as if I was criticizing the feminist movement as a whole? Criticize a portion of the movement isn’t critiquing the whole spectrum nor the core beliefs -yet, you made it look as if I was doing just that -as if I was stripping the importance of the feminist movement and denying the existence of sexism??

And please tell me when I can speak about the problems inside the feminist movement. Should I take a number and wait for you to give me the green light to speak about a matter that affects us as women and feminists and it’s very much real? Are you trying to downgrade my value as a person and feminist because of your purposefully misguided/twisted read of an ask? Have a quick look at the post I linked (you didn’t seem eager to read before jumping into my ask box) -where I state something between the lines of “the ‘rd’ feminism gives value only to women with culturally male traits leaving aside characters that don’t share such personality traits -like Ino, Mei, and Hinata”.

To me -the ask where my gender was inferred over my analyses of female characters in Naruto’s manga seemed a great opportunity because (and this is by no means a critique to that Anon):

It tied the notion of “niceness” with the female gender - because there’s the patriarchal belief that women have biologically a well-spirited nature.

Linked to the point above -being “nice” meant not being “misogynist��.

“Critiques” of a female character is a concept often tied to people receiving hate from these “rd” feminists.

I don’t know who you are and why did you twist my response so thoroughly -but please be kind and at least don't do it from the Anon form, if I’m going to be questioned about my feminist values and therefore, downgraded as a member of the movement, then I will like to at least know the name of the person trying to do so.

Have a nice day.

#anon #feminism #feminism in the naruto fandom

20 notes · View notes

lostinthosebrowneyes · 4 years ago

Text

Pedro Character HCs | Do they believe in ghosts?

Din Djarin

Agnostic would be the best word for Din. He’s about 50/50 skepticism and “well this might as well happen”. His son is a wizard, he’s not about to discount anything. That said, as much as he’d like to see his parents again, he’s not too convinced about the idea of ghosts... At least, not until Luke ever introduces him to his dad and mentors, then Din might start reevaluating some things.

BONUS (Aliens): His son is a little green man from outer space, so... yeah. I think we can safely say he believes in aliens.

Ezra

Ezra is one of those people who will play up believing in ghosts for the entertainment factor but he is a complete skeptic in reality. He tells a great ghost story, sometimes he even manages to fool himself with the noises he’s heard on alien planets, but at the end of the day the dead are just meat. He’d know if it were otherwise; he has accumulated multiple reasons to be haunted over the years.

BONUS (Aliens): Aliens as in a super-intelligent race that abducts and experiments on people, whose existence has never been proven? No. Aliens as in local fauna on alien planets? Sure, he bears witness to those nettlesome little critters all the time.

Frankie Morales

Frankie has seen far too much to be scared of the noncorporeal. He had a healthy sense of fear of the unknown as a kid but after he came back from combat, it all changed. Just because he’s a skeptic doesn’t mean he doesn’t enjoy the thrill. Strangely, supernatural horror almost became... comforting? Nostalgic? Like he missed when the worst thing he saw was bad SFX and somebody floating on strings. It’s not a real danger and that makes it a “safe” scare, like a roller coaster or some other adrenaline high. He loves haunted houses, especially if he goes with Benny who is secretly a believer in the supernatural ever since a young Will fooled him into thinking their attic was haunted.

BONUS (Aliens, Cryptids): I think Frankie is less committal about his feelings on aliens and cryptids. Aliens in the “it’s a big universe, who knows” kind of way, when he’s out camping and gazing at the vastness of the stars above him. Cryptids in the “look, most of it is guys in suits but my cousin’s best friend’s dog was supposedly eaten by a chupacabra” kind of way.

Javier Peña

Javier will never admit to believing in the supernatural. He has seen a lot of bodies and he’s never been haunted -- not supernaturally, anyway. He has superstitious family members so he won’t speak ill of ghosts, but it’s not his personal belief. He’s witnessed a lot of pain and death and he understands the need for the coping mechanism, but that’s all it is. At least, that’s his story and he’s sticking to it.

BONUS (Demons): The thing is, Javi has seen a lot of things over his career. He has seen evil in the hearts of men too many times to deny the concept of it. Javier will tell you to your face that he doesn’t believe in demons, but that doesn’t mean he’s going anywhere near that famous site of a demonic possession. It’s not because he’s scared, it’s because it’s a waste of time. And it’s late. And he has better things to do. Like you. Let’s get home. (Get in the fucking car and let’s gooooo.)

Marcus Moreno

Marcus Moreno isn’t a skeptic, he just doesn’t believe in ghosts. He and Missy would have heard something by now.

BONUS (Everything else): I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if Marcus has fought a demon. If not, he still believes in them. He also believes in mermaids, aliens (hello!), extra-dimensional entities and Bigfoot. Marcus will believe anything until proven false, including but not limited to The Loch Ness Monster. You say they’ve checked the loch top to bottom with cameras and found nothing? Maybe Nessie just can’t be captured by cameras. Marcus is friends with someone named Sharkboy. There are no limits.

Marcus Pike

As I said here, Marcus Pike believes in ghosts. Marcus had ~an experience~ in his college days after he and some friends spent the night in a haunted house on a dare. Ever since he has been convinced there is some form of life after death, even if he doesn’t subscribe to a specific theory of how it all works. He’s not particularly vocal about it, but if you try to make fun of people who believe in ghosts be prepared for him to make the case, “Well you know just because science hasn’t proven it yet-”. In general he’s more into the idea of gentle hauntings than your malevolent poltergeist situation. Ghosts who hold on after death to comfort their loved ones are the kinds of ghost stories that he’s really into.

BONUS (Aliens): As for other supernatural beings, cryptids are all hoaxes and he doesn’t buy the idea of demonic possession. But like Frankie, he thinks it’s not impossible to imagine among all of those stars there might be other worlds with sentient life. Yeah, Marcus believes in aliens, too.

Maxwell Lord

Maxwell is like Marcus Moreno in that he’ll believe almost anything, but like Javier in that he will never admit it. He is incredibly easy to scare but after you get him he will refuse to acknowledge that it happened. If Alistair says he saw a ghost in his closet, Maxwell will not be going to check the closet and show his son everything is fine. He doesn’t want to see a ghost! Alistair can just sleep in his room tonight and they’ll sort it out in the morning. Of course he’ll be telling Alistair how silly he’s being the entire time because ghosts aren’t real obviously! (What was that sound???)

BONUS (Everything Else): Demons, aliens, that’s just another Monday in the DCEU. Of course he believes in those. Magic and gods? Proven fact. Curses? He always keeps a good luck charm on him rather than tempt fate. Cryptids? Well, just because some of those photos have been debunked doesn’t mean they don’t exist. Maybe he should ask his acquaintances the daughter of Zeus and a literal cat lady.

#Din Djarin #Ezra Prospect #Frankie Morales #Francisco Catfish Morales #Javier Peña #Marcus Moreno #Marcus Pike #Maxwell Lord #Multiple Characters #Headcanons #Mine #Din Djarin Headcanons #Ezra Prospect Headcanons #Frankie Morales Headcanons #Javier Peña Headcanons #Marcus Moreno Headcanons #Marcus Pike Headcanons #Maxwell Lord Headcanons #Pedro Pascal Headcanons

26 notes · View notes

loudlytransparenttrash · 4 years ago

Note

Have you noticed over the years that the SJW stuff is seeping into STEM?

Wow, that sounds like a right-wing conspiracy theory to me that must be dismissed and never spoken of again. As long as you ignore all the following examples of social justice seeping into STEM, there is no evidence of social justice seeping into STEM.

In a 82-page training manual titled “A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction: Dismantling Racism in Mathematics Instruction”, the Oregon Department of Education plans to root out “white supremacy” in mathematics, by not asking students to show their work or placing any emphasis on getting the right answer, which will stop white supremacy from “popping up in the classroom.” The racist implication is that non-white students are incapable of “showing their work” or “getting the right answers,” and so teachers must scrap the academic bar altogether. To fight such white supremacy, math teachers are urged to accept TikTok videos from students instead of math work. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation fund the training.

Seattle public schools created a framework to protect children from racist and “oppressive mathematical practices.” Included in this report, educators and students will learn, “How important is it to be Right? What is Right? Says Who?“, “Who holds power in a mathematical classroom?“, “Can you recognize and name oppressive mathematical practices in your experience?” “Who is doing the oppression?” “Who does the oppression protect?”, “Explain how math and technology and/or science are connected and how technology and/or science have been and continues to be used to oppress and marginalize people and communities of color.” The Seattle school district also put into place a K-12 curriculum that encourages students “to explore how math has been ‘appropriated’ by Western culture and used in systems of power and oppression.”

The Department of Mathematics and Statistics at Wake Forest University now offers a “racist and anti-racist uses of math and statistics” class because “The time has come for us to focus on fighting racism and making plans to create a more equitable educational space.” In addition to the new anti-racism math class, the math department at Wake Forest has placed a declaration at the top of its webpage that affirms Black Lives Matter, pledges to try and hire more faculty of color and launch microaggression trainings, and organize a math/stats colloquium on social justice.

The University of California now require ‘diversity contributions’ and statements from future math professors. Applicants are asked to write a statement in which they explain how they will advance the university’s diversity plans. “The Division of Physical Sciences has a strong interest in ensuring that all candidates hired have the professional skills, experience, and/or willingness to engage in activities that will advance our campus equity, diversity and inclusion goals.” The purpose of the diversity statement as a method of evaluating a candidate’s “awareness of the barriers that exist for groups historically under-represented”, “past efforts in diversity and outreach activities” and “future plans to enhance equity, diversity, and inclusion in higher education.” One math professor at the University of California, Davis, wrote in opposition to the required “diversity statements,” referring to them as “using a political test as a screen for job applicants.”

The Mathematical Association of America released a statement in which it argued that mathematics contains “human biases” that can only be corrected by promoting critical race theory to math educators and students.

A math education professor at the University of Illinois argues that the teaching of math subjects such as Pythagorean Theorem perpetuates white privilege because they were developed by Europeans. “Mathematics itself operates as whiteness and who is seen as part of the mathematical community is generally viewed as white.” He also argued there’s no such thing as objective truths.

A Math Education professor from Brooklyn College argued that the "trope” of “2+2=4 reeks of white supremacist patriarchy.” It was also promoted by several academics at colleges around the nation, with another suggesting math should be reevaluated because it was primarily developed by white men. He also complains that “meritocracy” in math classes is a “tool of whiteness.” Teachers who claim color-blindness - that is, they claim to not notice the race of their students—are, in effect, oppressing them. “By claiming not to notice, the teacher is saying that she is dismissing one of the most salient features of the child’s identity and that she does not account for it in her curricular planning and instruction.” He recommends that math teachers incorporate more social justice issues into math lessons, but warns that even “teaching for social justice” can be a “tool of whiteness” if teachers are not sufficiently sympathetic to minority students.

A University of Rhode Island professor claimed that science, statistics and technology are inherently racist “because they are developed by racists living in a racist society, whether they identify as racists or not.” The professor also recently came under scrutiny after condoning an Antifa member killing a Trump supporter last year. After a commenter called him out for his position on his post, he replied “He killed a fascist. I see nothing wrong with it, at least from a moral perspective.”

Duke University has a new computer science course that will focus on race, gender, and class within the world of computing, in order to change the “working environment” of the field. “This course explores the diversity, equity, and inclusion challenges in computing through an introduction to and analysis of various social constructs and their impact on not only computing departments and organizations but also the technologies developed. This course also introduces students to cultural competence in the context of computing.” “We have to change the mindset of a workforce that is overwhelmingly white, Asian and male.”

A group of mathematics professors argued in their published book that math teachers must “live out social justice commitments” to fight privilege in the classroom. Math teachers, “must learn how to advocate for students, self-examine for biases, and strategically subvert the system in which they teach to counteract student oppression,” adding that the development of “political knowledge” is key. “Any amount of connection to issues of equity, diversity, social justice, and power is better than none at all.”

Activists persuaded top science journals to stop work for a day and to validate their claims of “white supremacy” throughout the American science sector. The small group of black academics and scientists demanded that science be “reorganized” for black Americans as they pushed the hashtag #ShutDownSTEM. One of their manifestos demanded that the goal of “justice for black Americans” be prioritized above scientific discovery and objective reality. Another manifesto portrayed all scientists who put science first are racists: “Unless you engage directly with eliminating racism, you are perpetuating it.” In response, two of the leading science publications, Science Magazine and Nature, agreed to not talk about science for a day and instead use their Twitter accounts to post the demands and claims by the radicals.

A physicist at the University of Zaragoza is using cross-dressing drag to “empower” minorities in science and technology fields. In an article on the website, Lady Science, he says drag is still uncommon in scientific fields, because “sexism, racism, ableism and LGBTphobia remain very much alive in academia.”

A recent paper published by a team of various college professors makes the case that STEM courses should be made easier for female students. The researchers argue that “gender” inequities in the STEM majored could be lessened by artificially inflating grades. The study claims that the STEM fields would see an 11.3 percent increase in female students if STEM classes practically erased grading.

A Vanderbilt University professor complained in an academic journal article that the field of mathematics is a “white and heteronormatively masculinized space.” In the article titled Unpacking the Male Superiority Myth and Masculinization of Mathematics at the Intersection, he argues that the apparent “gender gap” in mathematical success is socially constructed. He concludes by expressing a hope that future analyses of gender in mathematics take a more “intersectional” approach, after noticing “intersectional considerations of mathematics achievement and participation shaped by whiteness and sexuality” were left out of many of the studies he reviewed. Intersectionality theory from black feminist thought, he adds, can allow for “more nuanced analyses of gender” and its relation to mathematical performance.

Auburn Drive High School in Canada offers a class in “Africentric” mathematics. It incorporates “discussions about the students’ cultural backgrounds, history and their lived experiences,” all the while teaching them math and associated concepts “through an Africentric lens.”

A scientific journal retracted a professor’s article which criticized hiring based on skin color and sex, leading to apologies from both the journal and the professor’s university. The professor had wrote, “The rise and emphasis on hiring practices that suggest or even mandate equality in terms of absolute numbers of people in specific subgroups is counter-productive if it results in discrimination against the most meritorious candidates.” The journal withdrew the article “amid a backlash” and reassured the professor’s “views do not reflect our values of fairness, trustworthiness and social awareness,” and added they “stand against discrimination, injustices and inequity.”

Two national mathematics organizations are on a mission to prove that math education is “unjust and grounded in a legacy of institutional discrimination.” The National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics and TODOS: Mathematics for All, aim to “ratify social justice as a key priority in the access to, engagement with, and advancement in mathematics education for our country’s youth,” the groups declared in a joint statement, elaborating that “a social justice stance interrogates and challenges the roles power, privilege, and oppression play in the current unjust system of mathematics education and in society as a whole.”

Students at the Claremont McKenna Colleges staged a protest to make it known that objective truth is a ‘white supremacist’ myth devised by “white supremacists” to “attempt to silence oppressed peoples.”

Boston Public Schools have suspended their advanced academic program due to racial ‘equity’ concerns. Acceptance to the program was decided on standardized grade test scores and the successful students would be required “to study in greater depth, with more schoolwork and more home study than the traditional curriculum.” Because 70 percent of students in the program were white and Asian, the program was scrapped. A committee member said she was “very disturbed” by the racial statistics and noted they are “just not acceptable.” The superintendent said “There’s a lot of work we have to do in the district to be antiracist.” Advanced programs for gifted students often are targets either for complete abolition or restructuring due to “incorrect” racial and ethnic demographics.

A recent Washington Post article lamented the fact that biology textbooks contain a disproportionate number of “white men.” “They’re all men. They’re all white, and are written from a very white perspective.”

Cell, a prominent science journal, published a statement accusing their entire discipline of racism. “Science has a racism problem,” they assert, apparently concluding that underrepresentation of a given ethnic group must equate to a deliberate wrongdoing against that group. “Cell stands with our Black readers, reviewers, authors, and colleagues. We are committed to listening to and amplifying their voices, to educating ourselves, and to finding ways that we can help and do better. We alone cannot fix racism.” They go on to list all of the affirmative action changes they can make.

Fordham University’s Political Science department announced it had voted to adopt a new policy that mandates professors must use a student’s “preferred” name and pronouns. The decision was announced just two weeks after student activist groups demanded that the university publicly “resist transphobic rhetoric.” The activist students were inspired to make these demands after reading an article by the New York Times, which reported that the Trump administration had been considering defining sex as “male or female based on immutable biological traits identifiable by or before birth.”

The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics states on its website that “mathematics teachers should “reflect on their own identity, positions, and beliefs in regards to racist and sorting-based mechanisms” and “notice students, learn about the worlds they live in, and build mathematics that comes from these worlds.” They also hold webinars titled “Developing Social Justice Mathematics Activists in Pre-K-Grade 5,” its description states that “mathematics should become a social justice tool that empowers students to mathematically recognize and address oppression they see in their own world.”

Wayne State University, Detroit, dropped math as a graduation requirement and is replacing it with mandatory “Diversity courses.” UCLA also approved a “diversity graduation requirement,” which stipulates that every student in the College of Letters and Sciences take a course about “inequalities based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and religion, among other factors.”

Radical Math is “a resource for educators interested in integrating issues of social and economic justice into their math classes and curriculum.” Radical Math boasts over 700 lesson plans, articles, charts, books, and websites that cover a wide range of socio-political issues from redistribution of wealth to racial profiling.

A professor at the University of California-Davis has vowed to “challenge the authority of Science” by “rewriting knowledge” through a feminist lens. Science, she worries, has “earned its epistemic authority through its co-constitution with colonization and slavery,” and therefore “relies on a colonial and racialized form of power.” Not only is science rooted in racism, she alleges, it has been used to perpetuate racism and colonial practices. “At the root of the justification for social inequality then is Western science,” she says, claiming that science’s distinction between “humans and non-humans” has allowed “capitalism to be justified as a natural economic system.

The New York Times published an article highlighting several academics who say “Earth Science has a whiteness problem.” One of them, from Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, said white geoscientists should help increase a “sense of belonging” among non-white groups by “separating their privilege as a white person from their identity as a good person.” Another, who helped create a book club which fellow geoscientists talk about “race and white privilege,” added that earth science classes could be “enriched” by more Native American voices since “Indigenous people have a unique connection to the land.”

University of Wyoming added a diversity course in geosciences meant to address a lack of diversity within the field. The course was the result of a diversity survey conducted by the university in which 67 percent of faculty responded that diversity, equity, and inclusion classes should be required for all students. “The primary goal of the class is to raise awareness that lack of diversity, equity and inclusivity is a problem in our scientific community and in academia in general. The lectures aim to make students think about implicit bias that we often have and don’t recognize and students have the chance to learn from life experiences of scientists from underrepresented groups. The systemic racism that is present in our society also is present in academia. Black, Hispanic, women and LGBTQ scientists are disproportionally underrepresented in the student and faculty population, and students from underrepresented minorities are often the target of microaggressions on campus.”

The National Science Foundation is paying for a multi-million program at Drexel University to help teachers learn how to work social justice into their classrooms. “This project intends to promote social justice teaching, which emphasizes connecting science, mathematics, and engineering instruction to students’ personal experiences and culture. The long-term and far-reaching benefits to society of this project are the potential to document and share sustainable approaches, steeped in the context of social justice.”

The University of Louisville had an opening in its physics and astronomy department, but it ruled out white and Asian applicants. “University of Louisville is an affirmative action, equal opportunity, Americans with disabilities employer, committed to community engagement and diversity, and in that spirit, seeks applications from a broad variety of candidates. The Department of Physics and Astronomy announces a tenure-track assistant professor position that will be filled by an African-American, Hispanic American or a Native American Indian.”

UC Santa Cruz hosted an event called “Research Justice 101: Tools for Feminist Science” where “Participants will be challenged to apply principles and practices of justice to their own work, interrogating questions such as: Who benefits? Who is harmed? Who is most vulnerable? And ultimately, who do we do science for?” The workshop concludes with practical skills and resources for participants to push their research “to be more inclusive, equitable and attentive to social justice.”

A professor at the University of Illinois-Chicago wants others to teach “math for social justice” to help fight the “oppressive status quo” in the United States. He argues that teaching “critical mathematics” isn’t an option for math teachers, but rather a “responsibility to our future.” “We have a responsibility to our future and our planet, to life and all species. What we do in the classroom matters, for today and tomorrow, and the myriad possibilities for resistance and transformation.” “In my work, I argue that K-12 students need to be prepared through their mathematics education to investigate and critique injustice (such as racism and language discrimination) and to challenge, in words and actions, oppressive structures and acts.”

Central Connecticut State University is running a contest, asking students to "express their personal connection to the Black Lives Matter Movement” and reassures students that it’s lowering the racist grammatical standards for the contest. On the website, the school notes “submissions will not be judged on traditional literary or grammatical standards.”

A science education professor at the University of Arizona believes elementary schoolchildren are being taught “heteronormative” and “limited” ideas in science classrooms, and queer theory curricula is the answer. She explores in her lectures how “inviting sexuality into the elementary science classroom” and “queer theory can be useful tools for re-imagining elementary science education and elementary science teacher preparation.”

An academic journal article suggested appointing a “Safety Officer” and rewarding participation in “diversity programming” to combat “gender inequity” at scientific conferences. “Addressing gender inequity should be a primary consideration for all societies hosting conferences, yet many STEM conferences are struggling with gender biases and the understanding that gender inequity also applies to non-binary gender identities and intersectional diversity/overlapping social identities.” They call for the introduction of a gender-based Code of Conduct for all attendees to abide by, appointing a “safety officer” at each scientific conference to make it easier for people to report if they feel they have been subjected to harassment or discrimination, and paying the cost of travel for women who wish to attend the conference.

The director of libraries at MIT argued that tech workplaces need to ditch “Star Trek” posters and other geeky stuff to be more inclusive and welcoming to women. “Replace the Star Trek posters with travel posters, don’t name your projects or your printers or your domains after only male figures from Greek mythology, and just generally avoid geek references and inside nerd jokes. Those kinds of things reinforce the stereotypes about who does tech.” She is a self-described “butch and queer” cis woman and “the work of libraries and librarians is to support feminist research and agendas. She also complained that “A profession that is 88% white means 5000% agony for people of color, no matter how liberal and enlightened you think you are.” She also said we need to have “a f**king reckoning about the pain we cause, and that we need to do some hard work on decolonizing our organizations and our professions.”

PLUS ignore these hundred other examples.

33 notes · View notes

karinalwgst320 · 4 years ago

Text

Week 4 Using Social Theory for Understanding Social Media Continued 9/16

Have you ever thought about the concept of the importance of naming a child?

So, this concept has been something I’ve personally been thinking about for some time now. I don’t have any children yet, but my husband and I have been thinking of having a first child soon, and I brought this topic to him, the importance of the name we choose for our child. As most people do, my husband gave me the general answer that most do of the importance of the actual name and meaning of name, but me being a sociology major I thought more of the aspect of how my child’s name will represent him or her in our society. Like as stated by (Benjamin, 2019) Naming a child is a serious business. And if you are not White in the United States, there is much more to it than personal preference. (p. 16) Even though most of us would like to simply name our children to just personal preference, in our society we can’t. We have to think about our personal experiences with the name we were given and take into consideration that children don’t get to choose their names.

Do you think ‘public safety’ is a justification to be stopped for your name?

Always with all respect my answer is definitely not. As stated by (Benjamin, 2019) Depending on one’s name, one is more likely to be detained by state actors in the name of “public safety.” (p. 17) Even though I acknowledge that a person’s name does affect like in applying for employment, resumes, etc. I strongly believe that a person being stopped and much less asked to be searched just by their name is not a justification under public safety at all.

Are we asking too much in asking for at least no racism and no sexism in algorithmic decision making?

Once again, my answer being definitely not. If technology and the internet has become a big part of our society and future generations, we need to strongly reevaluate our information that’s being given and shares. Like stated by (Noble, 2018) We need a full-on reevaluation of the implications of our information resources being governed by corporate-controlled advertising companies. (p. 34) I believe that change will start when everyone is held accountable for their actions and involvement in shared resources.

Do you think most people know in depth about the concept of intersectionality?

I don’t feel like most people know and or understand about the concept of intersectionality as they should, since I believe it affects everyone. Most people speak about one topic of like race then separately of a topic like gender, but most don’t know about situations of when both are intersected. Like the example Dr. Kimberle Crenshaw gave on the YouTube video of What is Intersectionality? of how ‘African-American girls are six times more likely to be suspended then white girls. That’s probably a race and gender problem and not just a race problem or a gender problem…’

References:

Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after TECHNOLOGY: ABOLITIONIST tools for the New Jim Code. Social Forces, 98(4), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soz162

National Association of Independent Schools (2018, June 22). Kimberlé Crenshaw: What is Intersectionality? [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViDtnfQ9FHc

Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1pwt9w5

#csufwgst320baddies

7 notes · View notes

regrettablewritings · 4 years ago

Text

Animatic/Storyboard Music

Got bored/procrastinate-y on coloring in this ultra intricate card for my mom. So I’m just gonna make a list of songs I think make for good animatic material. Because why not/I wanna foist my musical tastes on people/ @locke-writes got me in a music binge. For the most part, it’s just gonna be me explaining the meanings or the vibe or what they generally tend to be used for, but really it’s mostly subjective so imaginate whatchu wanna.

“Trust Me” - The Devil’s Carnival Originally depicting a story about the Scorpion and the Frog, it’s the perfect song for when you want to depict the dynamic between a gullible or at the very least more grounded character and a figure whose intentions . . . may be less than pure. Or good for anyone, really.

“The Dismemberment Song” - The Blue Kid I have a playlist dedicated to songs whose content and sound are just . . . not married to one another, but got a weird flirtationship situation going on. Anyway, I’ve seen people say that they like to imagine it’s sung through the POV of a scorned housewife who’s finally Had Enough™️. And . . . They’re really not wrong for it. Really, though, it’s just the right song for when a sadist is just ready to gut a fucker but is disturbingly jolly about it.

“Love Me Dead” - Ludo Continuing with my trend of songs about people in less than ideal situations, “Love Me Dead” is straight to the point: The relationship is just awful and the guy gets nothing from it, but he can’t help but be hopelessly in a state of adoration for the woman he’s latched on to (“You’re born of a jackal! YOU’RE BEAUTIFUL!!”)

“Constellations” - The Oh Hellos There actually isn’t a plot to this song, it just feels really good (as all songs by The Oh Hellos are prone to be). However, if you feel a need to portray the concept of having to reorganize your thoughts after realizing that maybe they weren’t what you initially thought, and then coming to the conclusion that even though everything changes as a result, you’ll be alright? This is the song for you.

“A Kindling of Sorts” - The Oh Hellos An instrumental piece that is like . . . It’s related to another song of theirs about nationalism called “Torches”, so make of that what you will. (I personally have been using it to imagine storyboarding an opening for an animated The Witcher series.)

“The Other Side” - The Greatest Showman I know everyone and their mom has used this to portray situations like villains trying to get good guys to join their side. But I dun curr, it’s a fun song. That, and I like what Emilyamio did with her interpretation. It’s fun. For a basic rundown, know it’s another song about two characters’ dynamics being explored, with one coming to the other with a proposal that they join them in whatever endeavors they have in store. It’s often portrayed as something evil, but it really doesn’t have to be, as the original context was more about letting loose than anything.

“The Thief and the Moon” - Shawn James A much more mellow piece. Simple and straight to the point: A thief tells the Moon that he plans on stealing her light to shade the world in darkness. The Moon insists that the thief would only doom the world by doing so, to which the thief clarifies that he doesn’t care; if the world is shrouded in shadow, it means he will be able to steal with more ease (“My very existence is a race to attain wealth”). Disgusted, the Moon essentially curses the man with a warning that his greed can and will bring about his end -- and leave him to be forgotten by the rest of mankind, once it happens.

“Villainous Thing” - Shayfer James I’ve seen people say that this song is about singing to a cadaver but I can’t quite find anything confirming that (translation: I’m too lazy to look too into it). Regardless, it’s a fun ditty that yet again portrays someone with less than pure intentions encouraging someone to join him in some good old fashion villainy, as they’ve clearly endured their fair share of hardships and surely wanted to do evil anyway (“You’ll find no ever after here, it’s clear that isn’t what you came for“).

“Necromancin Dancin” - Bear Ghost Straight forward and fun as fuck: A necromancer apparently seems to cross classes and try his hand at barding by not only raising an army of the dead, but by also making them dance in order to make conquering the world easier. Because . . . a body doing Disco Duck isn’t scary, I guess.

"Aquaman” - Walk the Moon A song about one half of a couple wanting to become more involved in their relationship, but still having some nervousness about doing so. If you somehow haven’t heard this song yet, you gotta because it’s the cutest shit.

“Jenny’s Tale” - Ren I’ll be brutally honest, it’s about a woman named Jenny who just wants to get home after a long day of work and an unfortunate encounter with a 14 year old named Screech who gets way in over his head. As in, like, a death happens. That being said, I need. Like. An animated music video of this song. I imagine this shit in gritty charcoal or painted on glass, it just needs this. Somebody who isn’t me who knows what they’re doing, please look into this.

“The Curse of the Fold” - Shawn James As cheesy as it sounds, it basically boils down to not giving up or yielding. But what makes it so cool is the fact that Shawn James makes all his songs basically sound like a western gothic soundtrack. Which helps, because he admits that the title is also a reference to poker, in which giving up too often or too easily can often rob you of a delicious reward gained through perseverance and sacrifice.

“Thank God I’m Not You” - Himalayas I prefer to imagine this for an arrogant asshole of a character. Because that’s exactly what this song is about: They’re a liar and a thief, they’ve been called the son of Satan, and yet they consider themselves lucky -- ‘cause at least they ain’t you! If you have a character in mind who’s a delightful, punchable little shit, this is probably either their anthem or at least on the playlist you inevitably made for them.

"Passerine" - The Oh Hellos So there’s a common trend in The Oh Hellos’ discography that tends to explore the two founders’ experiences with faith and their growth in how they understand it or recognize it. With “Passerine”, the concept being explored is the experience they had when it came to taking a step back and realizing just how many of their supposed “fellow Christians” were actually doing some rather unchristian things, so to speak. When they “prune[d] their feathers”, it became clear that they had less in common with certain people proclaiming to be Christian while also spouting bigotry and greed. However, the desire to move away from such influences comes with the feeling of being torn, as moving too far away from the Bible leaves the singer feeling as though she is betraying something she holds dear. As a result, “Passerine” symbolizes not a breakage from faith, but a breakage from blind faith as they understood it, and the inevitable feeling of being torn that comes along with expanding upon how one views their beliefs and those around them. It’s therefore not uncommon to see Good Omens animatics using this song. (Something I also noticed is that throughout the song, you hear pieces of “Constellations”. TOH have a tendency to reference previous pieces, and considering “Constellations” is a song about changing perspective and the meanings we apply to them, it fits in beautifully with a song about reevaluating one’s stance.)

“Like the Dawn” - The Oh Hellos As stated before, a lot of TOH’s discography draws inspiration from their faith. In this case, it’s an outright retelling of the Garden of Eden, specifically when Adam awoke to find Eve had been created. What makes this iteration stand out to most, however, is that the singer is female, which seems to change the vibe you get. It sweetens the feeling of wonder we often forget the first man might’ve felt upon seeing somebody made for him, creating an air of beauty yet comfort with such lines as “And like the dawn, you broke the dark and my whole earth shook” or “You were the brightest shade of sun I had ever seen.” Even without the awareness or an interest in religious influences, it still manages to be a very feel-good song -- which is the mark of an overall good song in general!

“Confession” - RED Dealing with the constant battle of feeling ashamed that how you feel on the inside isn’t in sync with how you present yourself on the outside. That you should feel bad for smiling out at the world while screaming and thrashing -- like it’s a lie. But you can’t help it: It’s what you’re accustomed to. Though it does end on a hopeful note with the singer deciding that they want to reach out for help and rid themselves of this feeling of pain they have inside.

“When I Grow Up” - Matilda . . . Only if you want to cry. Seriously. When you’re a kid, everything seems difficult but you’re positive that once you grow up, everything will change: You’ll be tall enough to climb the trees you were too small to, you’ll be able to carry everything because you’re stronger, you’ll be brave enough to fight the monsters hiding in your room, you’ll finally have all the answers. . . . But life isn’t that simple. We wish it were, but it isn’t. There’s this bittersweetness about this song, about a sense of purity we unfortunately grow out of where we think things will be just the same enough for us to do what we want when we want, but things are more complicated than that. We still struggle to reach, to bear the weight, to not be afraid, to have even a fraction of the answers. But! We’re reminded that just because we’re told life isn’t fair, doesn’t mean we have to take it. After all, nothing changes when nothing happens. And even beyond that? It helps to remember that we’re never quite done growing up; there’s always more to learn, so remember to be patient with yourself.

“Hand Me My Shovel, I’m Going In!” - Will Wood and the Tapeworms This is . . . a song. The lyrics are honestly kinda all over the place and shooting rapid fire, making it a bit difficult to discern what exactly the singer is going on about. It makes for a pretty crazy song that suggests somebody’s going unhinged, which is apparently precisely the intention?? I’ve seen a lot of people interpret this as a song about a guy who is already at a low point in his life but nonetheless is going, “. . . I bet I can go deeper. Hand me my shovel.”

“No Reason” - Beetlejuice God if i had a youtube channel the segment i would spend on this song would be so juicy just ripe and thicc with thoughts and feelings i tell ya rich like a fresh fatty peach the apple that tempted Eve and gagged Adam yes ‘Nother song that explores the dynamic between two differing people and their worldviews. At its simplest, “No Reason” is about two opposite ends of a spectrum coming to a head: Idealistic and hippie-dippy Delia is convinced that everything happens for a reason, while cynical and depressed Lydia asserts that everything happens at random and it doesn’t matter anyway because we’re all going to die. And even though the delivery is ultimately a comedic one, you get more insight as to why one another feels the way that they do: Lydia, as we’ve previously learned, has recently lost her mother to an illness, which has left her depressed and feeling invisible (a theme in the show); whereas Delia’s failed marriage and desperate attempts to nonetheless be happy have left her dependent on the idea that these things had to have happened for a reason, otherwise, her pain would’ve been for nothing. What’s important is that neither side is actually appointed as the winner, with the song ultimately ending that the universe is random for a reason.

“Barbara 2.0″ - Beetlejuice Without spoiling anything (or at least too much), “Barbara 2.0″ is about growth. It’s about learning to put your foot down after a literal lifetime of being passive out of fear of what might happen and just accepting that nothing will happen if nothing happens -- but that doesn’t make whatever happens good.

“Bleed Magic” - IDHKBTFM It’s either about a killer or a vampire. No, seriously: When Dallon Weekes was asked about what the story of the song was, that was his answer. I personally prefer to think of it as a vampire or demon of some kind, given that the song came out around Halloween. Perfect for yet another example of somebody (likely supernatural) having an upper hand on an unsuspecting mortal. ...I have way too many of these on this list, I swear I don’t have a problem —

“Feel Good Drag” - Anberlin A toxic relationship of sorts. In that it shouldn’t be a relationship to begin with. Depicts the singer being approached by an ex, who seeks a one-night stand while her current boyfriend is out of town. However, the singer is aware that trying to continue anything regardless of the situation is a moot point: Even when they were together, their relationship was doomed from the start, and nothing about that is going to change -- especially now.

“Soviet Trumpeter” - Katzenjammer (It’s kinda difficult to work with this one but I’ve seen people work with less or stranger.) Based off the life of one Eddie Rosner, a Jewish Polish trumpeter whose fame within the USSR unfortunately faded due to the Soviet Union’s heavy censorship. Even if nothing is to be done with it, it still paints a melancholic picture of a talented man’s skills being largely unknown as a result of things beyond his control. All wrapped up in a song that denotes a strange deterioration in a way I can’t quite place.

“Apple Blossom” - The White Stripes On its face, it’s a very sweet song: The singer encourages his beloved to be vulnerable enough with him to tell him her troubles and to let him “sort them out for [her]”. She’s clearly saddened, and seeing so distresses him to where he insists that he will do whatever he can to make her happy. However, the tone of the song and certain lines make it easy to twist into yet another song of a character attempting to seduce somebody into a state of vulnerability . . .

“You’ve Got Possibilities” - It’s a Bird, It’s a Plane, It’s Superman The one singular song people actually liked from this forgotten musical. Perfect for when somebody intends on giving somebody else a makeover. Y’know, after totally roasting them on their posture and clothing. If you want to add a lil something extra, know that the context is that a lady wants to give Clark Kent a makeover, insisting that in spite of his schlubby appearance, there’s gotta be something underneath. I repeat: She is telling this to Clark freaking Kent.

“Still” - Anastasia In the context, the show’s antagonist (not bad guy, there’s a difference) finds himself torn between obligation and personal interest: Does he fulfill his duty and live up to expectations set upon him by his father and the society he’s been selected to help uphold? Or does he let a woman he has become fond of go? Is she truly as innocent as she claims? Or is she well aware of what she’s doing? And every time he thinks he’s reached a conclusion, he can’t help but thing, “But still . . .” Good for when you want to portray a character conflicted between obligations of politics and what their heart wants.

“Two Nobodies in New York” - [title of show] Two young men plan on entering an upcoming theatrical festival but struggle with what to even submit. This song in particular focuses on them trying to figure out what to even write, the concept of fame, and if wanting the certain things that may come with fame can mean anything from being sell-outs to getting a sitcom. It’s admittedly specific, but it’s a cute and funny interaction between two guys who are, for the most part, actually in sync with their thoughts and anxieties. For the time being.

“Into the Unknown” - Idina Menzel Look, I refuse to watch that movie. I just do. But I will take this song over That Other One any day. Mostly because I personally like to imagine that the singer in this song is about to embark on a Pixaresque journey after accidentally leaving her home during the night of The Wild Hunt, accidentally separating her spirit from her body and thus giving her a very limited time to get back to it before she remains a soul trapped in a whirlwind of ghosts forever. But first: Let’s sing about that strange howling that coaxes her so.

“You’re Gonna Go Far, Kid” - The Offspring I sure do long songs that can characterize a shithead . . . Anywho! The smoothest way to go is just to portray some cocky, manipulative shit who’s used to just lying and cheating their way to get what they want before slipping away without any consequences -- to a point. There’s the option of portraying the betrayer’s comeuppance, but there’s also the frustratingly delicious option of just letting them get away with whatever to lie another day.

“Why Should I Worry” - Billy Joel When in doubt, go to earlier Disney. Because like it or not, they had some bops. And when in the need of portraying a happy-go-lucky (probably idiotic) doofus and his more neurotic or cynical friend going about their life with the former just Mr. Magooing it while the latter suffers more realistic consequences? You go with this song. If you want. That’s just me.

“Transformation” - Brother Bear For when you want to invoke a mystical or otherworldly feeling. There’s really not much more I can say except to encourage you to listen to it and watch the scene if you can find it. You’ll get the vibe.

“No Girl’s Toy” - Raggedy Ann and Andy: A Musical Adventure It’s a big shame this movie is relatively unknown and never got a proper VHS release or anything -- mainly because the music in this cult classic is definitely stuff I could see becoming standards. I could see people performing “I Never Get Enough” for little shows, or recycling “Blue” for a different show. Thankfully, somebody was able to upload a clear enough sounding recording of “No Girl’s Toy”, so at least we have that. In context (just...follow me on this), Raggedy Ann’s brother, Raggedy Andy, has had enough of being subjected to “girly things” while in the nursery. Additionally, though, the way the song was written means it can also be interpreted as just a guy who refuses to let himself be yanked around regardless of how thick the sugar being laid on him is. . . . If you wanna poke fun as a character for trying to appear tougher than what he is, here’s the song. (That being said, Andy is a sweetheart at the end of the day. No amount of tough-fronting will hide that.)

“I Enjoy Being a Girl” - Flower Drum Song (It is by sheer coincidence that this song follows the above.) Really, it’s exactly what it says on the tin: The singer enjoys being a girl and what all it entails for her. She loves her feminine form, she loves the attention she gets, she loves dolling herself up, she loves frilly dresses, and she hopes to one day marry a guy who enjoys “having a girl like [her].” And honestly? Good on her! Love whatcha love, lovely! Seriously, though, it’s a cute song for anyone who just wants to indulge in some girliness.

“Chip on My Shoulder” - Legally Blonde Come on: It’s Legally Blonde. You know what this bop is, or at least have an idea of it. But since I love this song, I’ll indulge: Disheartened by her failure to both win back her ex and succeed in the fast-paced environment of Harvard, the normally bright-eyed Elle is ready to call it quits. That is, until junior partner Emmett gets involved. Unimpressed by her story, Emmett reveals that he got to where he was by busting his ass due to having a chip on his shoulder from his rough beginnings — and maybe a chip on the shoulder is exactly what Elle needs to survive. And as somebody driven by spite, I can appreciate that kind of message. Anywho, it all in all is a song about growth and learning how to be “driven as hell” to keep up with an opportunity that may not be easy to take, but is not one to be passed by.

“What Do I Need with Love?” - Thoroughly Modern Millie “What Do I Need with Love?” asks exactly that: He could date a different girl every night of the week if he so wanted, and never once had any desire to go steady before. He considers himself lucky to have never fallen for anyone -- until now. Which he’s not! He’s not in love. ...He totally is and, by his own admission, he’s got it bad it’s terribly adorable.

“Interlude IV” - Zach Callison The entire album is actually a narrative about a failed relationship of Callison’s and I’m sure the other songs are just as great fuel for animatics -- I’m just too caught up on listening to this one over and over. Sometimes, we just wanna listen to Steven Universe cuss and be openly furious. Seriously, though, even without the context of the rest of the story, you get the idea well enough: A spiteful Zach decides to get back at the one that broke his heart in such a painful way, whereas a well-meaning friend insists they just leave it be and move on. While this technically would be the better and healthier option, Zach is just too far gone with rage to let it go and decides to take care of things by himself.

“Evermore” - Beauty & the Beast Look, I know the remake wasn’t anything crazy. But also I don’t honestly care too terribly much. Besides, this song was nice and it really gets me after that key change. We all want a royal doofus to be enamored enough with us to let us go for our own happiness but still know that their life will forever be changed because they met us. Animate that shit. Over and over.

goddamn this list is long lemme just stop this now byyyyeeeee

#long post #boop #music post #sorta

12 notes · View notes

eli-kittim · 4 years ago

Text

A Critique of Contextual Theology: Are the Meanings of the Biblical Texts Changeless or Adaptable?

By Author Eli Kittim

——-

What is Contextual Theology?

Is all theology contextual? Do different contexts have the role of attributing theological meanings to Christian texts? Or is there a subtext that does not change? And, if so, what are some of the criteria that assign meaning to theology, particularly to Christian theology?

First of all, what is “contextual theology” anyway? It’s basically a way of doing theology that takes into account both past and present contexts, be they anthropological, biological, psychological, philosophical, or otherwise. That is to say, it reconsiders the cultural milieu or the Sitz im Leben (i.e. the “setting in life") in which a text has been produced, as well as its particular purpose and function at that time. Contextual theology, then, considers both the traditions of the past, which received the revelations, as well as those of the present, and reassesses them within the framework of today’s socioeconomic and political context. In other words, the term contextual theology is a reference to the way in which Christianity has adapted its teachings to fit the successive cultural periods.

Some Examples of Contextual

Theology

For example, the early church fathers were heavily influenced by Greek thought, so their interpretation of scripture was largely derived from Platonism (e.g. Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, etc.). That was their particular form of contextualizing theology. Every book of the Bible was composed and edited within a specific context, be it the Exodus, the Law given to Moses at Sinai, the Babylonian Exile, or the occasional letters of the New Testament that were prompted by some crisis. And we could go on and on. Aquinas’ philosophical conceptions were heavily influenced by the rediscovery of Aristotle’s works. Not too long ago, existentialism provided the impetus for a new type of theology, and so on and so forth.

It seems as if Christian theology has hitherto been articulated in the context of the life and times in which the texts were interpreted and read. Hence the shifting theological paradigms, down through the ages, appear to be byproducts of this cultural phenomenon. As time passes, people’s ideas about theology seem to change as well. Questions associated with the quest for the historical Jesus, the nature of the triune God, and the like, arose out of much debate and discussion that often included diametrically opposed contexts. As the church councils began in the early part of the 4th century, one contextual paradigm triumphed over another. Similarly, various paradigms and approaches to scripture began to shift during the reformation and counterreformation. At the end of the day, who is to say which was the true one?

A Brief Introduction to Contextual

Theologies

Contextual theology, therefore, is a response to the dynamics of a specific cultural context. People from a different cultural worldview, such as Latin or Asian or Arabic culture, have distinct economic and social issues. That’s why there are so many contextual theologies, employing various interdisciplinary approaches, to try to explore these different sociopolitical issues, such as African theology, Minjung theology, Liberation theology, and so on.

Let’s briefly define some of these theologies to get a taste of their doctrines. Minjung theology (lit. the people's theology) is based on the South-Korean Christian fight for social justice. This theology has developed a political-gospel hermeneutic to address the Korean reality. From this point of view, Jesus is seen more as an activist for social reform than as a spiritual teacher.

Another branch of Christian theology from the Indian subcontinent is called Dalit theology. It places heavy emphasis on Jesus’ mission statement, which some theologians call the Nazareth Manifesto (Lk 4.16-20), namely, the proclamation of “good news to the poor,” the release of prisoners, the “recovery of sight to the blind,” as well as letting “the oppressed go free.” From this perspective, Jesus is identified as a marginalized Dalit (i.e. a servant) whose mission is seen as liberating individuals not only from their sociopolitical and economic oppression but also from racial segregation and persecution. But does this theology really capture the core message of Jesus’ mission? Is Jesus really a political “liberator” who is solely interested in an economic and political system that guarantees equality of the rights of citizens? Or are the impoverished those who are not materially but rather spiritually poor? Although the physical dimension of these Biblical passages cannot be denied——after all, many were physically healed of all diseases, according to the narratives——nevertheless, given that the sermons of Jesus emphasize sin and the issues of the heart, one might reasonably argue that he’s referring to the prisoners of sin, and that the recovery of sight might be a metaphor for the truth that “will make you free” (Jn 8.32).

Similarly, many contextual theologies misinterpret the Beatitudes as political manifestos. Notice that Jesus says “Blessed are the poor in spirit,” not the materially poor (Mt. 5.3). Moreover, he doesn’t say blessed are those who are physically hungry and thirst. Rather, he says, “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled” (v. 6). So, we have the poor in spirit who will inherit “the kingdom of heaven” (v. 3), and those who hunger for spiritual righteousness who “will be filled” (v. 6). It beggars belief that any theologian can misinterpret this pericope from the Sermon on the Mount as nothing more than a social concern for the materially poor, while promising some sort of Marxist political and economic liberation for oppressed peoples.

This is precisely how Liberation theology interprets such passages. Liberation theology was developed in Latin America and was employed politically as a “preferential option for the poor.” It is true that the Bible is concerned about the welfare of the poor and needy. But it is not a political manifesto designed to liberate them through some new political system. To see Jesus as a prototype of Adam Smith or Karl Marx is to miss the point entirely. Although the Bible certainly addresses these issues and urges us to be equitable and compassionate, its primary message is soteriological, urging us to be born again: “be transformed by the renewing of your minds” (Rom. 12.2); be “born from above” (Jn 3.3)! Clearly, this is a *spiritual* message that has few political implications. It’s also important to note that Jesus did not want the crowds to politicize his message (Jn 6.15 NRSV):

When Jesus realized that they were about

to come and take him by force to make him

king, he withdrew again to the mountain by

himself.

The Excesses of Feminist Theology

A subset of this view is Feminist theology, which is primarily concerned with the oppression of women. The aim of feminist theology is to liberate women from a hitherto patriarchal society by giving them equal rights among the religious authorities and clergy. This theology attempts to reinterpret patriarchal language and imagery about God, while reevaluating the status of women in sacred texts. Feminist reinterpretations of scripture will often reject the male gender of God and will omit using male pronouns to refer to this figure. Feminist theology will often call into question authoritarian, pontific, or disciplinarian images of God and replace them with “nurturing” and “maternal” attributes.

This theology has inevitably led to the excesses of various sects who even describe Jesus as a woman. For instance, the “Dongfang Shandian” (aka Eastern Lightning) is a Christian cult from central China which teaches that Christ has been reincarnated as a woman, and that the saints are engaged in an apocalyptic battle against China's Communist Party. However, these are gross exegetical errors which take liberties in manipulating the language of the original text to suit their theological needs.

Case in point. In his recent book “What Jesus Learned from Women,” author James F. McGrath took a simple verse (mentioned only once in the entire Bible; Rom. 16.7) and turned it into a novel where both Paul and even the great Jesus himself have come under Junia’s spell. The implication is that both Paul and Jesus may have gained valuable knowledge from a woman named Junia. It’s all based on a single, isolated verse which doesn’t even hold a single shred of historical, textual, or literary evidence to substantiate the claim. Not only does it contradict Paul’s explicit statement in Galatians 1.11-12—-in which he says that his gospel is not of human origin and that he “did not receive it from a human source”——but it also subordinates the status of the miracle-working Son of God to that of an unknown female follower, who supposedly taught him everything he knows. Unfortunately, this one-verse doctrine is equivalent to speculative fiction. It simply doesn’t meet scholarly and academic parameters.

Problems of Contextual Theology

The Contextualization process is employed in the study of Biblical translations as regards their cultural settings. Hermeneutically speaking, contextualization seeks to comprehend the origins of words that were used by the Hebrew and Greek texts, and Latin translations. However, it has also allowed secular and political groups to read their own message into the text by expanding the cultural contexts so as to accommodate such meanings. Given that modern liberal contexts are intrinsically alien and sometimes even contradictory to the authorial intent of the scriptures, the contextualization process of attributing cultural or political “meaning” to a text can have dire consequences.

The omission and replacement of the words of scripture with more “context appropriate” terminology with regard to race, gender, inclusive language, sexual orientation, and sociopolitical considerations, coupled with large-scale contextual *reinterpretations,* not only violates its integrity but it also represents a desecration of the text, which actually expresses a fundamental equality of all people whose identity is derived exclusively from Christ: “There is no longer Jew or Greek [race], there is no longer slave or free [power structure], there is no longer male and female [gender]; for all of you are one [equal] in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3.28 NRSV).

Even though the Biblical texts were created within a cultural context and not in a vacuum, nevertheless the verbal plenary inspiration——the notion that each word was meaningfully chosen by God——supersedes the cultural milieu by virtue of its inspired revelation, if indeed it is a revelation. In that case, the language from which the text is operating must be preserved without additions, subtractions, or alterations (cf. Deut. 4.2; Rev. 22.18-19). Therefore, It is incumbent on the Biblical scholars to maintain the integrity of the text. One thing is certain. The New Testament was not only significantly changed by the Westcott and Hort text, but it has also been evolving gradually with culturally sensitive translations regarding gender, sexual orientation, racism, inclusive language, and the like. Contextual theology has broadened the scope of the original text by adding a whole host of modern political and socioeconomic contexts (e.g. critical theory) that lead to many misinterpretations because they’re largely irrelevant to the core message of the New Testament and the teachings of Jesus!

——-

6 notes · View notes