#which is so much. so much misogyny. like were the early 2000s that bad?

[opens-up-4-nobody]

Christ. I forgot how insane House and Wilson are.

House MD, my beloved 🖤

[aj-thegreatest]

Fame and Paparazzi in LO: An Underdeveloped Picture

So this is gonna be less of a "formal" essay, and more of a...ramble unfortunately. Stay around if you still wanna read lol.

I've always been interested in stories where the public eye, media, and/or paparazzi become one of (if not, the only) driving forces in the story. Or stories where the main character is always on guard, protecting their image against the people who twisting it for their own means. See also: any story set in Hollywood, or any story set in a royal/high status environment.

So you could only understand my disappointment on how it's used in LO. Because ideally, this should be a straight shot! And it started off fairly decently.

Persephone, a complete nobody, gets thrusted into the spotlight by meeting an influential powerful figure. And we do see the negative effects of this through Tori and Alex (I can't remember which one got their eye snatched but I honestly kind of don't care about their characters I'm sorry). Persephone can't readily make friends because of Hades' actions. For a moment, she's isolated among her peers. And it's good! And then...

It...barely gets mentioned for like, a majority of the series (Don't worry I will get to that part near the end) There are other moments mentioned (Hera disguising herself as paparazzi as a "test" for Persephone, this notable visual from Minthe's POV)

And it's not anything...substantial? The audience doesn't get to the emotional/mental effects from this. Especially directed at Persephone, who'd ideally be the perfect person for this. It encourages the audience to sympathize with her, which I know the narrative wants. Like, desperately. One of the main rules in LO is to be on Persephone's side, 24/7. And we know what happens if people aren't:

But I also know one of the secret rules of LO, is Persephone cannot suffer/go through genuine hardships. She can't get slandered (rightfully or wrongfully) by the press, because it'd be too hard for her. She can't have a truly unfair trial, because it'd be too unfair. And, if the ending of LO means anything, she can't even have her long distance separation with Hades.

It's why Persephone doesn't get this overall treatment from the press. In the context of the world, she kind of skirts by and doesn't get recognition for it? It's a bit like Retsuko Post S2, where she should probably start getting noticed more but it just doesn't happen.

Even after the trial and her punishment, she can freely walk down the streets of Olympus like she's the most hated goddess around (I'm not even saying this to be mean, if I had a family in the Mortal Realm and I couldn't see them for a decade? I'd be pissed).

I'm going to take time to mention the video that inspired this ramble, Lindsey Ellis’ “Yoko and the Beatles,” which goes into the history of the Beatles and Yoko Ono. It also touches on other famous women, like Courtney Love, Britney Spears and others, who were slammed by the media and press. There is/are a lot of elements at play, to misogyny and racism (in Yoko Ono’s case) that effected their treatment in the public eye. And a lot of this came in the late 90s/early 2000s, which was a very bad time to be in the press. No sympathy at all.

I’d highly suggest watching it for yourself if you haven’t, because the treatment in the video did remind me of an LO character, but not the one the narrative wants us to think of-

Minthe got dumped on in the story, in WT comment section, and by its own creator! It’s no wonder people give her more grace/sympathy, because she’s barely standing up by the time she gets planted. But back to Persephone because it’s always about her:

So. the only time Persephone gets slammed like that is near the end…where the narrative decides to input all the criticism to the evil scary villain who sucks sooooo much:

And it’s like…ok. So. Typically, when a character is getting mistreated in the press, the claims are usually sensationalized and inflammatory. Borderline slander. We, the audience, should not be on the press’s side unless we’re supposed to take validity in those statements.

The best example is the 2nd interview in Bojack Horseman, where the audience is expected to see Bojack as a deeply flawed and messed up person who, when things get really bad, will throw people under the bus to save his own skin (I.E, him mentioning Sharona in relation to Sarah Lynn drinking for the first time). 

And there’s obviously situations where it’s a lot more morally grey, when it comes to the media and press. It’s all about who’s telling the “real” story and which one is the “fake.” But in this, you as a writer need to make a decision: how is your audience supposed to take it? Should we be on the press’s side, like in the case of Bojack, or should we be on the character’s side?

Now. In this moment with Persephone, it’s clear we the audience are supposed to sympathize with her. But everything Apollo (and the other citizens) are saying is…correct. Persephone is responsible for this, and she hasn’t really owned up/done enough to manage it. She’s sitting there in her ivory tower, pulling the “woe is me” act like she did in the trial. And somehow, we’re supposed to be on board? When we haven’t been given enough evidence that Persephone genuinely cares and they’re wrong about her?

And this could’ve worked! If Persephone owned up to her mistakes and wanted to change, we’d be on board! Look, she’s actually developing! But because Persephone can never be in the wrong, the narrative bends itself like a game of Twister for her to always be right. And that’s boring in a story that’s supposed to have stakes.

I’m actually gonna end this off on a positive note, and talk about the best use of the media in LO. While Persephone is at school, after she’s spent the night at Hades place, she comes across this in the bathroom:

This is genuinely perfect! We see how the press/media defame Persephone, and how people are reacting to it. We see her being affected by this in her day to day life, with the Cherry on top being the “Goddess of Sluts.” It’s so bitter and borders on Highschool levels of petty, and it works. This is probably my personal fave moment in the LO Pilot!

And I will forever be shocked on why this wasn’t included in the WT version. It’s so simple to put in, but it’s almost like the press was sprinkled in…instead of being baked into the story. A dash of media slander here, a scoop of cliffhangers, and another sprinkle of SA, and that’s all it is, really. Or just a plot that didn’t spend enough time in the dark room

[creatorofarcadia]

I keep hearing a general sentiment of "oh woe it is the awful writers fault" when it comes to Dean being misogynistic, and this is true to a certain extent. There are certainly moments when Dean and the show generally come across as misogynistic because it's an early 2000s show written by men. For example, in the early seasons everrrryyy episode there's a new hot woman who despite her horrifying situation, is still making heart eyes at one of the brothers because that's obviously a women's top concern in every situation.

HOWEVER!

There are also times when Dean's misogyny feels like purposeful characterisation instead of "oh the writers are exposing their own bias". Even in the pilot when he's gross to Jess, to me, she's always looked vaguely uncomfortable, but like she doesn't want to cause a problem, rather than "oh you! So funny and charming! What a bad boy!". There are plenty of moments were Deans comments are met with disgust from Sam/other characters (e.g., the infamous cheerleader moment) which suggests to me the writers know what he's saying is gross and that's the point.

Idk, maybe I'm being too optimistic about the standard of early 2000s TV and his misogyny really is always an attempt to be funny that fails. But I've always felt sweeping Dean's misogyny away as "the writers being mean" ignores moments were imo they're very much painting him that way on purpose, with Sam there as a foil.

(Disclaimer: that's not me saying Sam is never misogynistic, just that when Sam/others express discomfort with Dean's comment's it indicates to me that the audience is also supposed to find Dean's misogyny uncomfortable rather than funny)

[autistic-danieljackson]

So I've just finished season 9 of SG-1 and it definitely has different vibes than the rest of the show so far. Not bad! I didn't think it was bad at all which I feel like a lot of people write it off. But it almost feels like an SG-1 spin-off, if that makes sense? Like SG-1 2.0, it's not quite the same as the first 3 seasons but you sort of need to know the history of how we got here. Anyway, some quick thoughts before I start the last season. Cannot believe I'm here already but also feel like I've been watching for so long even though it's been less than a month.

First, I need to apologize to Vala Mal Doran. I'm so sorry I was too boring at 10 years old to appreciate her, she is such a fun character and I think naturally brings the silliness that's kind of missing with Jack gone. I'm very excited for her to be a series regular for season 10, cannot get enough.

Second, I'm really not sure what I think about Cam. I hadn't seen much of season 9 or 10 before now, when I was first watching it was before streaming and I'd come home from school and there were 2 episodes of Atlantis and then 2 episodes of SG-1 on each night so I just had to watch what was on(I'm not that old but god did writing that make me feel so old 😂). Anyway all this to say I'd seen Cam before but I didn't really know his character. I think Ben Browder did a great job but I think they tried to make Cam younger Jack 2.0 and I wish they would've just made his character more original. They could've made his character more interesting but I also get that they were probably trying to appease fans who were probably upset that Jack was gone. I think it could've been handled better but I don't actively dislike Cam.

The only thing I do dislike about his character is that it feels like he's undermining Sam a lot. Obviously the in-universe reason for why he's in charge of SG-1 makes sense now, Sam left to work at Area 51 and Cam was brought in to lead the team. But like...it just feels like so much bullshit. Again, they could've just had Sam in charge and had Cam come in as this young hotshot. It just feels so disrespectful to her character and being with the team for 8 years to now be second chair to the new guy. Also I know it was the early 2000s and there was a fair share of casual misogyny everywhere but it just felt extra gross coming from someone who just stepped in and basically took her spot. Like in the Kassa episode when Cam's insisting that he be the one to go collect information and he calls Sam 'Mary Poppins'? What is that even about?? (To be fair, the writing of that whole episode was not great, that's the only episode where I was like okay yikes yeah this is not super good) I just think more could've been done with both of their characters and I really would've liked to see it play out differently.

Don't care for Landry. Never did, that hasn't changed. I feel like he's unnecessarily mean a lot of times and I just don't like him.

Carolyn Lam, however, I do really like. I like that they finally got a steady replacement for Janet and although no one will ever truly replace her, I think she does a solid job. Not sure how I feel about her being Landry's daughter, I feel like that plot time and energy could have gone to other parts of the story but it's also not bad.

It definitely feels quite a bit different from earlier seasons, with a cast change and a totally new villain that hadn't even been heard of before I don't think that's a surprise at all. But I think it holds its own well enough and I'm definitely glad I didn't write it off without giving it a chance. Very excited to start season 10 and then start on Atlantis!

[bru1sed-apple]

this isn’t to dig on ur anti zutara post but rather start a discussion.

in my experience, the reason we zutarians don’t like zukka is because of the animosity we get from the fandom. we analyze the subtle details we are given because practically every zuko and Katara interaction in the show is because all of them save the first have some degree of zutara in it. their chemistry- be it platonic or romantic- is undeniable.

and yet, we are told by zukkas and kataangers that we are wrong for shipping the ship. a lot of zukkas sideline the women in atla- sokka is given a lot of Katara’s qualities that are stated in the show (ie: people claiming that sokka is the team dad when he literally confessed that he saw Katara more as his mother than his actual mother), mailee is just there (majority of the mailee fics on ao3 are just them being a side couple in zukka fics), and not to mention comradekatara’s posts from back when they were lesbians4sokka about Katara being homophobic. even if it was a joke, it was something that people took seriously. a lot of the same zukkas are the ones making fun of katara for talking about her mother’s death when that literally happened three times outside of the southern raiders episode.

dont get me wrong, I know that the zutara fandom was absolutely rabid in the early 2000s and that’s where we get our bad reputation, but the only time that we’ve had issues with other people in the atla fandom was when they interacted with our content and it blew up.

Honestly you make some points I agree and disagree with so I'll go one paragraph at a time

1.

I do agree that some zutirans get hate that isn't deserved. I definitely think that a lot of the fandom doesn't like zutartians, I'm part of that group as well (for the most part). I also do think they have chemistry, but more in a way that's more like family rather than lovers.

I think the over-analyzing is a bit too much, I'm overwhelmed every time I see a zutara post. Obviously, some analyzing is okay, I sometimes analyze ships, but I feel like zutartians do it sm that it feels kind of annoying?? Maybe that's just me, but I feel like you don't have to analyze things just to justify your ship. Just ship what you like

2.

I agree with the fact that zukka shippers tend to sideline women in fics. I've def read fics where katara is sort of villanized, and I definitely don't agree with that. A lot of the time, ppl prefer MLM ships to than WLW ship, (which if you ask me, is because ppl prefer male characters to female ones (*cough* misogyny *cough*)(though i dont think most of the misogyny is purposeful))

Idk if it's bc we're in different parts of the fandom, but I've never really seen ppl say that shipping zutara is wrong?? I've seen ppl say they don't like it, and why, but they always state that they don't care if people ship zutara and that they're only stating reasons they personally don't like it.

Perhaps it's because I tend to stay away from the more toxic part of the community because if I see smth I don't like I more often than not just scroll past. But I def believe that their are zukkas who are toxic, but I think some of that is just because ppl are toxic, no matter what fandom you're in.

I can't really speak on kataangers because while I do like the ship, I'm not really in that part of the fandom, so I'm not sure if ppl are unnecessarily mean to zutarians.

(Edit: nvm kataangers can be real assholes, I def believe that they're unnecessarily mean to ppl who dont ship kataang 😒😒)

3.

As for the zutara Fandom in the early 2000s I can't really speak on that bc I didnt watch atla until I wanna say 2017 or 2018. So I don't really know what the fandom was like.

So yeah, that's kinda my take?? Idk I spent like a good while trying to figure out what to say 🤧🤧

[viccharine]

who the HELL is panicking at this disco!!!!

(reblogs greatly appreciated!)

(available on my ko-fi shop!)

process + commentary under the cut!

about the piece: i found myself in a bit of a slump after pushing out so much art in about 2 weeks so this piece took wayyyyy longer than any of my other ones. i knew I wanted the concept of a thermometer as a “cigarette” (do you guys get it. because like. a fever you can’t sweat out. a high fever. right you guys get it right??????) but it took me a LOT of tries to eventually land on a composition i actually liked—do not even get me STARTED on how I incorporated the title. I couldn’t decide on using a font or hand lettering or even where to place the text, it took me a solid two days to get to where it is now and I’m not even 100% happy with it. i tried to mimic a playing card design with the text placement but I’m not sure how well I pulled it off

here are some of the process pics:

the concept itself comes from a lot of the references to addiction in the album as well as the heavy burlesque, early 1900s, circus influence on the album aesthetic (whoever thought of this album theme deserves an award, AFYSCO has genuinely some of the coolest concepts from a design perspective to me)

about the album: AFYCSO is probably one of the best debut albums imo (although that title probably goes to Olivia Rodrigo’s “SOUR” for me)—it’s genuinely in my top three favorite albums of all time, no skips whatsoever on there. regardless of my opinion on Panic! at the Disco (which was pretty much neutral, I never really got into bandom and I didn’t really listen to panic’s music outside of AFYSCO) AFYSCO will always have a special place in my heart, both musically and lyrically it’s SO GOOD

although, I will say that there are some misogynistic undertones (and in some cases just outright misogyny) in these lyrics—I did touch on this topic in my DANCE DANCE commentary so I won’t repeat myself, check that post for more of my thoughts. all in all, the album bangs, but the misogynistic undertones were basically unavoidable if you look at the album in terms of being written by a teenage boy in the early 2000s who got cheated on. hell hath no fury like a woman scorned but the devil himself doesn’t write lyrics like a teen boy cheated on—go figure. im not saying all the songs have misogynistic undertones but I will say there are a couple that are WAY in ur face (looking at you, I write sins)

anyway, that’s basically it, ok byeeeeee!!!

p.s: i was debating mentioning this because I feel like im beating a dead horse, but in light of Brendon Urie’s recent actions (as well as past controversial actions), I don’t support him and feel extremely bad about the people who his actions have hurt—but I don’t think that means much from a person who never really liked him in the first place. again, while I was a BIG fan of AFYCSO, I never really got into Panic! at the Disco (I only listened to Pretty. Odd. recently this month and before that I only really knew the big radio hits). im not gonna pretend like I know everything about what happened with Panic! at the Disco in recent years and truly? I don’t Care to find out—panic! has been disbanded, and while I look at AFYSCO fondly with nostalgia, I don’t feel much about the band itself

p.p.s: AFYCSO almost killed me once because when I had a kidney infection (although I didn’t know it at the time) I had an INSANELY HIGH fever. I thought to myself “haha this is a fever I can’t sweat out!! like the album!!” and then promptly passed out—I wasted my last coherent thought on some stupid P!TAD joke instead of. asking for medical attention. anyway I ended up in the emergency room so I didn’t die but it was a near thing

[fantastic-nonsense]

This is a bit arbitrary, but is Oracle’s existence public knowledge pre-Flashpoint? As in, does the average citizen know of Oracle? I’m reading up on Barbara because I’ve only read her pre-Crisis Batgirl stuff so far, but I’m kind of… iffy about the BOP book because of the writers.

No, Oracle's existence wasn't public knowledge. Babs' identity was completely secret until halfway through Ostrander and Yale's Suicide Squad run and even after that most of the heroing community didn't know who she was, much less the general public. Birds of Prey as a book largely functions on the reality that the team is, essentially, a covert ops team led by a figure whose existence isn't public knowledge and whose identity is somewhat unknown even to the larger heroing community. As we move through the post-Crisis timeline, Oracle's existence largely stays secret from the public but most of the heroing community knows that she exists and works with her. She even had a stint where she worked closely with the JLA during the Watchtower era.

In terms of her secret identity: the Bats know that Babs is Oracle, and the Birds know that she's Oracle, and various individual heroes (like Ted Kord and certain members of the Justice League that she regularly works with) know that she's Oracle, but there's still several people who have no idea that Barbara Gordon and Oracle are the same person (much less that she used to be Batgirl).

By the time we get to Blackest Night/Brightest Day in 2010, Babs decided that too many people knew about her existence as Oracle and way too many people out of that group knew that Oracle was Barbara Gordon. So she faked Oracle's death to the larger superheroing community in a very mid and weird BOP plotline called 'The Death of Oracle', leaving only a select number of people (most of the Bats and the BOP) aware that she was still alive. This canonically had major consequences for several heroes who were relying on her intel and were in the middle of dangerous assignments when she went dark, but also wasn't properly explored as much as it could have been since a) The Black Mirror, which Babs co-starred in, was also happening at the time and b) the reboot happened shortly afterwards.

In terms of Birds of Prey the book, Vol. 1 (1999-2009) is pretty solid the entire way through:

Funnily enough I consider Dixon's Birds of Prey run to be one of his Top 3 comics. There's a reason an all-female team title written in the early 2000s survived long enough to be handed over to another writer and it's because Dixon made it work. Babs (and her relationships with other characters) is his one exception when writing women and I still don't know why 20 years later. There are definitely still significant amounts of Dixon Flaws™ that shine through in that run, but he's one of Babs' best writers and is still probably the best Dick/Babs writer we've ever had–largely because he's one of the few writers who actually gives a fuck about Babs as a character separate from her relationship with Dick. Which is weird because it's Dixon, but it's still true.

Gail Simone's run is well-written with good plotlines and has better treatment of the characters overall. It's also extremely racist at times (specifically anti-Asian) and occasionally veers into weirdly immature "high school mean girl bickering" interations. She writes an excellent Babs, but I think she was also dealing with a lot of external and internalized misogyny as one of the only major female writers at DC and as someone who got to where she was because she played somewhat nice with the "good old boys' club." Her work on BOP is not without significant flaws, but it's also a really fun read and I recommend it.

I wouldn't really bother reading BOP Vol. 2 (2010-2011) unless you're a completionist and every post-Flashpoint iteration of the team has been either "decent concept, bad execution" (the New 52 book) or "this is just bad, pull it now" (every version of the book since). If you remove Oracle from the equation and pretend like post-Flashpoint's watered-down Batgirl!Babs is a suitable replacement, you've already lost a fundamental aspect of what made the book work in the first place.

[rollercoasterwords]

look i am all for increased representation when it comes to canon queer characters and i love that there are so many more books and shows and movies now that feature queer characters and depict queer experiences. however. i truly do not know if anything will ever compare to the high of that very specific brand of early-mid 2000s queerbaiting that was the bastard lovechild of misogyny + homophobia. i'm talking like sherlock merlin supernatural...fucking...lotr....like back when these big shows + movies were too misogynistic to have any fleshed-out female characters, and so every intense emotional bond portrayed was between two men and unintentionally became so homoerotically charged that u were basically just watching extended scenes of two dudes eye-fucking each other, except you knew nothing was ever going to happen bc it wasn't cool to like gay people yet + so the most u could ever hope to see onscreen was like. a really intense hug. and even that was so sexually charged that it basically felt like u were seeing them fuck raw + nasty, and yet the creators + the actors + the whole fucking world would gaslight u + be like why can't u just let two men be friends if u even dared 2 suggest that watching these guys gaze longingly at each other every time they think the other's not looking + tremble with forcibly suppressed lust when their hands so much as brush made u insane. god it was like being edged. like yes queerbaiting is bad but it's bad in the same way that cigarettes are bad which is to say that i think i should be allowed to indulge in a little carcinogenic hedonism every once in a while. as a treat.

[angelsdean]

Despite claims that Dean calls women "bitches" when they reject his advances.

Uhm??? That is not what I said?? I said he called women bitches when they did something he didn’t like? Namely their enemies. In fact when he was attracted to a woman he treated them like a true gentleman. It was their enemies he was aggressive towards. And saying the word ‘bitch’ was directed towards women 3 times is fair and all. But how many of their enemies in season 1 were women and how many were men? And did he actually ever run into a female enemy that he did not call a bitch in the earlier seasons? Idk no offense or anything it feels like you’re taking this a bit personally. The tone in your post about how much he used the word bitch was kind of coming off as confrontational. I’m looking at this as a case of bad writing rather than anti-deanism or whatever everyone thinks is going on here :(

I'm really very sorry if I misunderstood that! From the way it was worded in the previous ask: "it was because he tried to fuck anyone with boobs and the minute a woman did something he didn’t like he turned around and called them a bitch" I read that statement as suggesting "the minute a woman did something he didn't like" in relation to the flirting / trying to sleep with them. Like, woman rejects him trying to sleep with her >> he calls her a bitch. But now I can see what you meant in the context of villains / enemies. And I do agree, the three only instances from just looking at s1 were directed only towards enemies and it's something I do want to continue keeping track of as I watch.

I'm also sorry if my tone came off as confrontational, I definitely did not mean for that either. I was mostly in "academic" mode lol so it was more about "disproving" the claim that he calls women (who are not enemies, but potential interests) bitches. I really find all of this fascinating and engaging and like you said there is a lot of bad writing to look for and also just, the show being a product of its time. Unfortunately early 2000s television was rife with casual sexism and misogyny and we definitely saw that leak into the show and some of Dean's behaviors. The writers have their own biases and bigotry too which is definitely important to consider when we're doing these analyses / character "studies."

I'm not mad at you personally, anon, and do invite you to continue to share things you find too and add to this conversation. If I came across as a bit defensive or confrontational it was less about you and your individual ask and more toward the general "fanon" view a lot of people (dean 'crits' or 'antis' or whatever) have toward Dean that often is not based on actual evidence from the show or is based on one small thing that has gotten exaggerated or misinterpreted in fanon. And since I've been rewatching recently it's just so hard not to be like !!!!!!! when I see how canon things don't match up with some fanon interpretations.

I have some other asks in my inbox that may have been from you ? I'm not sure, that I also plan to answer but this was the most recent and I just wanted to clear things up and apologize<3

[kamreadsandrecs]

Title: The Secret History of the Pink Carnation (Pink Carnation #1) Author: Lauren Willig Genre/s: romance, historical, Regency romance, contemporary romance, adventure Content/Trigger Warnings: historical period-accurate misogyny, parental death (offscreen, in the past), references to beheadings, violence Summary (from publisher’s website): Nothing goes right for Eloise. The one day she wears her new suede boots, it rains cats and dogs. When the subway stops short, she’s always the one thrown into some stranger’s lap. Plus, she’s had more than her share of misfortune in the way of love. In fact, ever since she realized romantic heroes are a thing of the past, she’s decided it’s time for a fresh start. Setting off for England, Eloise is determined to finish her dissertation on that dashing pair of spies, the Scarlet Pimpernel and the Purple Gentian. But what she discovers is something the finest historians have missed: the secret history of the Pink Carnation—the most elusive spy of all time. As she works to unmask this obscure spy, Eloise stumbles across answers to all kinds of questions. Like how did the Pink Carnation save England from Napoleon? What became of the Scarlet Pimpernel and the Purple Gentian? And will Eloise Kelly escape her bad luck and find a living, breathing hero all her own? Buy Here: https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-secret-history-of-the-pink-carnation-lauren-willig/11087824 Spoiler-Free Review: So this is actually a reread of this book, which I first read all the way back in the early 2000s, when it was recommended to me by a friend who also suggested I read The Scarlet Pimpernel by Baroness Emmuska Orczy - of which this book is supposed to be a sequel. (Yes, I know Orczy wrote actual sequels for The Scarlet Pimpernel, but my friend also told me NOT to read those because they were going to extinguish whatever love I had for the first book. I haven’t been inclined to go looking, so I haven’t read them.) Anyway, back to this book! I remember being thoroughly entertained by this when I first read it, and I’m glad to note that it holds up pretty well to my memory of it the first time around. It’s still as fun and occasionally funny as I remember it being, and I’m still utterly delighted by the story as a whole. Amy and Richard’s romance is fun, even if it’s not EXACTLY the type of story that I usually favor, and their hijinks are very much in line with what I remember reading in The Scarlet Pimpernel. In fact, there’s plenty of that DNA in this book, which, if you’re coming right off reading Orczy’s novel, will certainly make this an even more enjoyable read. Rating: five pink carnations

[toxicnorn]

i can’t necessarily speak to discussions of transmisogyny in hp pre-2010s/2020s for virtue of the fact that i was not personally tuned into spaces that discussed this in the 2000s (this was also obviously before jkr went very publicly off the rails, though in retrospect, that was always lowkey an aspect of the series even if i didn’t pick up on it at the time; i will say that i recall jkr showing her ass on trans stuff on twitter before people give her credit for it, but i don’t remember the specifics of my timelines) but i’ve seen people very seriously say that there were no discussions of any of the problematic (i hate using that word because i associate it so much with 2013 Tumblr but there’s not really a better alternative) aspects of the books until very recently, and that’s categorically untrue and i’m going to give you a history lesson

this is very rambly and unedited. i am also coming into this with the perspective of a white AFAB culturally christian person, which obviously affects how i interact and interacted with the world. for better or worse, i have been extremely online since 1996 and i have been interacting with fandom since before some tumblr users were even born, which is like. not actually a good thing. i don’t see fandom as something inherently bad or inherently good; it’s a hobby i’ve had the same as editing pixel dolls or playing on pet websites. tho you have no idea about the drama of pixel dolls and pet websites. it has no innate value save that which we make of it, which is the same of most things. and, being an artificial construct, it’s inherently influenced by the shitty stuff that goes into it.

anyway

especially towards the ends of the 2000s/early 2010s, there was a lot of discussion on LJ particularly about racism, antisemitism, homophobia, misogyny in the series, often on people’s personal blogs and usually more mild than what you’d see on tumblr, which is not a tone argument thing but which i’m merely bringing up to highlight the fact that people sent death threats over people going “i think maybe the narrative doesn’t treat girls well here.”

it’s just that this was met by a lot -and i mean a lot- of hostility: think the worst tumblr anons and make it on main but also make it more pseudo-intellectual. a lot of it was couched in language that anyone with criticism of any aspect of the series was not actually a fan (and an imposter, possibly a soccer mom) and that if you didn’t 100% enjoy an aspect of something, that’s on you for consuming it, the whole general ���don’t like, don’t read” attitude that still gets shilled whenever someone says they don’t like something. a lot of fan culture is ultimately based on a very “us vs The Other” mentality while raising up products for enjoyable consumption (ie the canon book or movie or whatever, and also the fandom built up around it) as something elevated above (perceived or real) reproach, and that obviously is still very much an aspect of fan culture today, hence all of tumblr and people making ideological stances (and by this, i mostly mean strawman arguments shouted into the void for people to misinterpret however they want) about fanfiction a core portion of their online or real identities. which is to say, dysfunction is inherently built into fandom because it’s a microcosm of a dysfunctional society, a hobby whose adherents try to argue that it’s inherently a refuge from the greater world but which can never fully escape its influence, existing as a reflection of society at large while denying it.

or, if you want to translate that out of loser pseudointellectual speak, fandom at large was and continues to be racist, antisemitic, etc. as fuck and harassed the shit out of people for saying that cho chang is kind of a dumb name and that the whole house elf thing is kind of fucked up. seriously, the hp fandom was racist as fuck in 2009 and probably still is because fandoms are large are often very white, very tme, very culturally christian even if they deny it (i am saying this as someone who is all three things) and close in when those things are threatened unless it’s to the point that no one can deny it anymore (and even then), but i cannot personally verify the current vibe of the harry potter fandom because i don’t go there.

anyway, it’s not really a coincidence that when there were more widespread discussions about racism/sexism/etc. in fandom on LJ that it started to decline in popularity among fandom types and fandom culture latched onto tumblr. a fair number of shitty people flounced and migrated over to this website and that’s had way more to do with how fandom’s shaped up on tumblr than anyone really likes to admit. if you were a Big Name Tumblr User in 2012, there was a really big chance you were a former livejournal user who left for a site where less people recognized you for doing both stupid and heinous shit or just generally being a dick. this resulted in a tumblr culture that would very much try to silently drown out any criticisms of the series with vague positivity and “we have to UNITE” and a lot of other stuff whenever someone went “guys have you checked out what she’s done with native american belief systems. it’s uh. not great.”

this is not to say that fandoms have not gotten better in a lot of respects because they have, but, like, obviously it’s still shitty in a lot of ways, though sometimes i wish people were just outright homophobic instead of couching their dialogue in disguised language. a lot of tumblr/twitter culture revolves around not sounding -ist rather than like actually changing anything in any meaningful way.

anyway

this is all a lot of words to say that a lot of the current discussions going on in fandom have been going on for over a decade, but a lot of people in fandom today have no clue about that because the fandom also very deliberately tried to bury it, and by burying it, i mean virulently harassing people because they said something was a little sexist or whatnot

[queerextremity]

ok so i finally watched ‘she-hulk’ and oh god, it was so bad

(spoilers for ep1 ahead!)

1. i’ve already posted on why making steve’s virginity such a big deal is problematic at its core, but it also makes jennifer so creepy and unlikeable from the get-go. she’s never met him, he’s not her friend, he’s basically like a celebrity in her world and i thought we’ve all agreed that ppl who obsess over celebrities’ sexual life so much are creepy. i just feel like we’re so tangled up in our perception of steve as a fictional character that we don’t realise how weird it is from her side. the post-credit scene literally sounds like something bruce came up with so that she would leave him alone. it’s just so weird to pester steve’s friend with questions about his sexual life. oh, and her line about how sad it is for ‘that ass to die a virgin’ is so acephobic and i feel so very offended by it. it literally says your life is sad if you never had sex, which is incredibly toxic and has the possibility of making many people who see this feel bad. sex is just an experience someone has and someone doesn’t. it’s not the most important thing in life and it doesn’t change anything about the person you are and the happiness you’re able to get from life.

2. the virginity stuff is generally very good at representing the kind of character jennifer is. i feel like in that scene they were trying to make her super progressive, sex positive and show us that women in mcu discuss sex freely and aren’t ashamed of it. and i think we’ve seen the fight against slut-shaming turning into virgin-shaming thousands of times before, but it’s like the world was so done with it somewhere in early 2000′s teenage comedies. mcu is so late in here. the show is just like that. it tries to be feminist so hard, it tries to make jennifer independent, funny, totally in control of her life, but she just comes off arrogant, invasive and mean. it’s not internal misogyny, i would’ve hated a male character like this even faster.

3. her monologue about women and anger is true, but it’s just... stuff we’ve already heard a billion times in countless of other shows. i don’t even see the point of she-hulk if she’s so good at controlling her anger. you can’t just throw some feminist monologue in my face to justify it. she-hulk had so much potential to play with gender norms since women usually aren’t allowed to be angry, uncontrollably angry especially. a giant green monster who smashes everything it sees isn’t a type of character written for women. it could’ve definitely been interesting. but jennifer is still good with her anger, instantly good at being hulk and she’s not a big giant monster at all. she’s still very feminine, just green and stronger. what is the inner struggle of her character so far? what is the point of her learning to be hulk if she’s so good at everything already?

i’m not sure if it was like that in the comics and i don’t really care, because it’s still just boring to see and it’s not the story we need to see in 2022. 

4. i’m all for feminist talk in any shapes and sizes, but i want deep and layered stories about women’s struggles. ‘she-hulk’ just acts like its audience is stupid, so they need everything explained at the most basic level. well, probably more is too much for mcu. maybe we’ll get stories like that in 10 years!! let’s hope they won’t be late by that time, just like ‘she-hulk’ is by now.

5. oh, and yes, as for a comedy show, it sucks. i haven’t even smiled once during the episode. this is the least funny mcu show so far.

6. i know dozens of shows where the first episode is shit, but the rest is gold, so i never instantly judge. i’ll give it another chance and hopefully have the desire to take half of the stuff i just said back. but something tells me i won’t

7. tatiana maslany is actually great and i see how she tries to make something out of this terrible script. 

[weeinterpreter]

Female Characters in the Artemis Fowl Series

Following me, botching @orangerosebush fun post with some critical feminist talks (sorry!), I shall try to make a new and more coherent (but not necessarily complete) comment on the female characters in Colfer’s books.

Before I start, though, I want to clarify that I love the series and my criticism isn’t me throwing shade because of hatred. I am pointing out these things because I deeply care about this book series. Also, I know the books were published in the early 2000s, so our world views have certainly progressed. But, let’s start and see where we end up.

Looking at the book series, we have five female characters that play big roles: Holly, Opal, Juliet, Angeline and Minerva.

Let’s start with Opal, because I got more and more frustrated with her, the more often she was used as a villain.

What really bothers me is how Opal is being reduced to such a ridiculous villain. She appears in 4 out of 8 books, but I can't take her seriously, especially since she gets more and more deranged. She was a good villain in her first appearance, but starting from TOD, she starts getting unstable. She eats truffles, is jealous of Holly’s beauty, wants to be the Queen of the world, etc. Imagine, Spiro or Cudgeon – two villains who were also scrupulous and didn’t shy away from murder – eating chocolate and envying Arty of his beauty. Their roles would have had a completely different connotation. We didn’t get that with any of the male antagonists. Their antagonism was never linked to their gender.

Opal is like the Evil Queen in Snow White, who asks the mirror if she is the fairest of them all and succumbs to her weaknesses. Opal’s antagonism was more and more played for laughs, which for me plays into some old patterns in which female characters never really succeed and/or are taken seriously compared to their male counterparts. And whenever something goes well for a female character, chances are, she is considered a Mary Sue.

Minerva gets this treatment in canon (not taken seriously) and from the fandom (”Mary Sue”). Her father wants to buy her ponies the whole time and in the end, she gets outsmarted by Artemis. Compare this with Artemis in Book 1, whose adult bodyguard travels around the world with him, because he wants to catch a fairy and then he not only kidnaps a fairy, he also gets to keep the money. Despite all that, the fandom initially hated Minerva, possibly because people thought she was too much like Artemis/too perfect. In the end, Colfer dropped her from the books and we never see her again.

I’d even go so far and say that Holly was a victim of the “female curse”. She is the one character in the books, who probably has the hardest time.

She never really succeeds. First, she has to fight to get a position in LEPRecon. She has to fight her way through misogyny, and (I assume) is giving her other female colleague a hard time by pointing her finger at their femininity. Root gives her a hard time, but is supporting her, eventually. When she loses this ally, she has to give up her career in the police, because she can’t work/doesn’t want to work with Ark Sool. Trouble Kelp just swallows it, works his way through to Commander, and succeeds.

When Holly tries to become a private investigator, she fails and has to accept Vinyaya’s offer in joining Section 8 (regardless, if she wanted to or not, her private agency endeavour fails vs Mulch and Doodah Day = Success). This rarely happens to male characters/private detectives? Thinking of such movies as “The Maltese Falcon” or the “Dresden Files” book series. They always somehow manage with their agencies, no matter how hard the overall hardships. They rise from the situation like a phoenix from the ashes.

Due to her time in Hybras, Holly ends up isolated from her peers. Everyone around her gets married, has children, etc. Her only real friends are humans who will die centuries before she gets old. She does get to be a Commodore (which I don’t think was a position before?), but it seems to only have come with a huge sacrifice.

We meet Juliet at the age of 16, being a maid and training to become a bodyguard. After the mind wipe, she decides to become a wrestler and she was one character, I was genuinely hoping to see go her own way. She became a wrestler, but suddenly in Book 8 she is going back to be the twins’ bodyguard. This really annoyed me, but I understood it was a temporary thing, so when I read that Colfer was planning on bringing her back and described it as a "Michael Corleone" thing (note: A character who wants to get out of his family's business but ultimately fails), I got really worried. It will be interesting to see if Juliet has to give up her wrestling career in Book 3 of the twins, to be the full-time bodyguard for Myles and Beckett, because it would just play into the same pattern, imo.

One last thing about Angeline, because this is already getting really long. This touches on mental illness, and I am no expert (and I am also not a fan of its portrayal in Book 7), but compared to Artemis, who gets a “funny” mental illness (one that is played for laughs), she gets the whole shebang. Delusions, not recognising loved ones, hurting her son. It seems like a lot, compared to Artemis’ Atlantis Complex, who afterwards gets treated and is taken care of.

I am sure there are lots more examples, and this is far from complete. Feel free to add or disagree, I am really interested in your thoughts. All these examples are not bad storytelling devices, I just think that if they happen to the majority of female characters, then that is noteworthy. Also, I am not accusing Colfer of deliberately doing all this to his female characters, I’m just pointing out a pattern, I have noticed. 

[augustheart]

i was going to write a big, long post, but it's kind of early in the morning for that. so the tl;dr of it is that they turned a character whose secondary trait is loving his wife into a misogynist* and then narratively played that misogyny for laughs, and by the time they tried course correcting at the beginning of season five and actually writing him As A Person, the damage had pretty much already been done.

they'd also started out on the wrong foot by making him a corrupt cop that became a private investigator after he was fired, when ralph's Always been a detective and never a cop, willingness to tamper with evidence or not. while in his debut issue he and barry butt heads due to barry thinking he's just pretending to be a superhero and is actually stealing things, this is resolved by the end and they become boyfriends partners best friends. on the flash they butt heads because barry got him fired for committing a crime. this sucks!! i do think there are some good moments in that original season four episode, like when he first gets his powers and everyone is just losing their minds over how much they hate it, but other than that it's really, really bad up until. like. episode eleven. (i like the one where he "dies," though. that one feels like comic book ralph to me.) episode... either five or six is so Screamingly misogynistic it makes me lose my mind.

and to give some fandom context at the time, this was on top of him having been added to a show with an already pretty needlessly bloated cast that the writers were having trouble juggling. so if your favorite character is literally Anyone else, suddenly their screentime is being given up for a guy nobody likes when they were already barely getting any. and this was all before the actor turned out to be a shitty person.

(*in the early 90s, it became kind of a Thing to basically write everyone as deeply misogynistic for laughs, and ralph definitely caught a stray bullet in that a few times (and a few more times when giffen was trying to recapture that in the early 2000s with superbuddies, which is a very bad comic) so i can't pretend that he's never been written that way. but i figure if other comic book fans can ignore that this happened with their favorites who were way worse in that era, i can hang onto ralph--especially since a lot of that behavior was textually an act he would put on to annoy others and the JLE weaponized this one time when they needed a specific guy professionally bothered. ralph can certainly be unintentionally annoying both to readers and characters in-universe, but that's more a reflection of his flamboyant nature combined with his deep love of attention.)

it is wild how much the flash fucked up ralph considering he was one of. like. three characters on the show at the time to actually be a flash character

[angels-heap]

idk man something about people absolutely ignoring alyx and obsessing on the two white boys just doesn’t sit right with me. like I love gordon and barney and I like both freehoun and freemance but where’s the love for the her? she’s literally the second most important character

Agreed! I mean, there’s a lot of nuance here because as much as we like to (justifiably) side-eye people for sidelining Alyx so the white boys can smooch, I also want to acknowledge that freehoun is a great ship and there’s something to be said for wanting more m/m content and representation. We don’t want to turn this into an Oppression Olympics situation where we argue about whether strong female character / racial minority representation is more or less important or “woke” than m/m relationship representation; they’re both important, and one of the cool things about fandom is that there’s space to explore either (or both) as much as we want!

That said, however, I’m really disturbed by the way some new freehoun shippers seem to genuinely loathe and despise Alyx for no reason other than that she’s “getting in the way” of their m/m ship. I can’t tell how much of this is the usual toxic shipping nonsense (casual racism/misogyny to clear the way for gay ships) vs. younger fans not having a lot of context to critically analyze early-2000s video games, but either way, it's toxic and it needs to stop. 

I’ve seen a lot of people complain that Alyx is “oversexualized,” which seems like a really strange take to older fans because she was actually one of the least sexualized, best-developed female video game co-protags of the time, and even by today’s standards. Yeah, the devs threw in a couple gamer bro eye candy easter eggs and went a little overboard with the flirting at times (it was 2004, folks), but all in all? She’s really not that sexualized, and to use the game devs’ questionable creative decisions as a reason to dismiss her as a “thirsty bitch who won’t leave Gordon alone” (paraphrase of a real sentiment I have encountered in the wild) just reeks of misogyny. 

In fact, a lot of the things newer/younger fans have been saying about Alyx sound suspiciously similar to the criticisms voiced by racist, misogynistic gamer dudebros who were angry that Valve wrote her as a non-sexualized, awesome biracial lady with agency instead of a sex doll with a gun. Anyone who says Alyx is “annoying” and won’t acknowledge that Barney’s AI and voice lines are just as bad (if not worse!) should take some time to reflect on where that anger is coming from. Same for people who think she’s “slutty,” “ugly,” uninteresting or that she should literally die (yes, I’ve seen this one in the wild too) to pave the way for freehoun to become canon—which it won’t, by the way, and that’s okay. 

Like, y’all... it is totally possible to create freehoun-focused fan content without ignoring/demonizing/literally killing Alyx to get her “out of the way,” and Alyx is an interesting character in her own right! People have been making space for Barney and the other supporting cast in freemance fanworks for 16 years; there’s no reason freehoun creators can’t do the same with Alyx. There’s a lot of potential there, in fact! 

I’m not saying every single freehoun author/artist should make a point of including Alyx just for the hell of it, but if you’re bending over backwards to avoid acknowledging her existence in a positive way when it would be appropriate to do so, maybe think about why you feel so threatened by her character and try to unlearn some harmful internalized biases. You’re mad about real-world homophobia and comphet; neither of those things are (fictional character) Alyx Vance’s fault.

Blargh. Aside from all that, it just really sucks that Alyx finally got her own game and most of the enthusiasm about the game and her character got drowned out by HLVRAI and then this new flood of freehoun stuff within a couple weeks of HLA’s release. It sucks so much. 

[starship-imzadi]

S5 E17 The Outcast

Androgyny is defined as having both male and female characteristics so that a specific gender cannot be determined.

Jonathan Frakes has reportedly gone on record to express his belief that Soren should have been cast with a male actor as it would have sent a stronger message. And I absolutely agree.

As it is, Soren identifies as a woman and is played by a woman which is just reestablishing a heteronormative status quo. In fact, all of the credited cast who portray the J'naii are women.

I have a problem with this. Often times the dichotomy of western heterosexual gendering is seen as "the haves and the have nots". E.g. men have body hair, women do not (which is absolutely untrue). Women are emotional, men are not (also absolutely untrue). Women as "the weaker sex" are often seen as "without" and androgyny is sometimes construed as being more "without" because it's supposed to be lacking the characteristics that give definition or.... features that are identifiable as a certain gender. Casting all women to be androgynous is, in a way, sexist for this reason. Though the non speaking and background J'naii are far enough away they seem less defined and more androgynous (some might be cast with men but it's not possible to tell...which is the way it should be).

Okay...so, Riker gets a bad rap for his struggle with pronouns and misgendering BUT what he's doing is actually incredibly important and valuable. Riker is canonically an American, heterosexual, cis gendered, Caucasian, male. He is the character that the most privileged, and most represented demographic will see themselves in and relate to. He is put in a position where he doesn't understand the experience of the person opposite him, he's trying his best and he makes mistakes, but he's also demonstrating that he's open to learning.

I've also seen some small uproar, especially from younger viewers (I'm looking at anyone born after the year 2000) over the writers not using they/them pronouns "I do not think there is really a translation". It is true that "they" as a pronoun to refer to a non specific person in common speech has been in use since the time of Shakespeare. Up until women's suffrage in legal context the pronoun used was "he" without specifically meaning a man. I.e. those pronouns were place holders for an unknown person regardless of gender or sex. Non masculine or feminine pronouns used to refer to a known individual is a slightly different story. There have been many different pronouns developed and used to greater or lesser extent through the entire 20th century (e.g. Hir or Xe) However, none of them really caught on for regular use across the entire language. "They" has been adopted most successfully because it is already in the language but its prominent use and acceptance wasn't until between approximately 2013 and 2015. This episode aired in 1992.

I really like that early on Soren and Riker are given an established shared interest. Too often on this show two people are put together....and it's not clear why they like each other. In such a short span of time it's tough to establish a believable new relationship, but this is a good first step.

They've known each other two days? It is reminiscent of "The Masterpiece Society" just a few episodes ago where Troi started to fall in love after five days. (Maybe they're both just very loving people.)

Also, in the midst of the misgendering, I'm pleased that the writers (or whoever) chose for Riker to use "he" because it plays against this species that's supposed to be androgynous but... Have a tendency to look feminine.

Riker's dad had a recipe for split pea soup...I wonder when he ever cooked it though. Riker mentions that it's good for cold Alaskan nights and it's the second episode in recent memory of his mentioning that he's from Alaska (the other was "Conundrum") I can't actually remember it being mentioned prior to that episode.... though there's a good chance it was established in the "Icarus Factor" and i know it's mentioned again in "Lower Decks"

A lot of the focus on this episode from fans seems to be on Soren being transgender but the J"aii are also homosexual. Riker and Soren have two different paradigms that are represented as neither worse nor better nor even given a moral label, they're just different. (Although, the J'naii's insistence that Soren cannot be male or female in gender or sex, is clearly meant to be the reciprocal of any insistence by humans that we can only be male or female in gender and sex.)

"I like one who's intelligent, sure of herself, who I can talk with and get something back. But the most important thing of all, she has to laugh at my jokes."

This conversation has a great sub text: different men like different things in women (and vis versa) so for someone to even identify as "heterosexual" doesn't mean every member of a different sex is attractive to them. And it begs the question: why are so many people with different qualities all under the same gender "umbrella"?

I've seen screen caps of Soren asking about human male genitals but they only show Riker's surprise. Really he deserves more credit because he handles the question really well. The way he handles everything very kindly and graciously, and the fact that Soren continues to ask questions, is a real testament to the safe place that he makes for discussion and curiosity.

There's some... dark humour in how Star Trek talks about misogyny and sexism. It's one of the notable hypocrisies and failings in star trek: to talk about a better future, while still operating on damaging ideals, and without any real idea of the journey it would actually take for society to reach "better". Both Gate and Marina had struggles with how they and their characters were treated compared to the men.

Oh boy. Worf's sexism fluctuates a lot, but when they need someone to be a misogynist, Worf is the go to and it's always painful. And Data asks the innocent, child-like questions. With a scene like this there are unfortunate reflection on some of the characters BUT the main purpose of the scene is, a slightly heavy handed, means of proposing different view points for representation and comparison. It's not really about the characters at all.

I'll say just from experience with that long hours spent working together will create some sort of bond for pretty much any two people. Love or other wise.

This scene is clearly about Soren coming out to Riker. And he takes it as kindly as he has everything else so far.

Geordi has a beard! (LeVar apparently grew it for his wedding)

"good hunting commander"

"thank you sir. See you for dinner." Do Riker and Picard have dinner together? (I love a good found family shared meal).

I really like this scene between Will and Deanna.

"well this one looks like you" with the teddy bear absolutely gets me every time. And Deanna's side look! I love their friendship and comfort together.

"You're my friend and I thought... I don't know, i thought I should tell you."

"I'm glad you did"

"Nothing will change between us, will it?"

"Of course it will. All relationships are constantly changing. But we'll still be friends, maybe better friends. You're a part of my life, and I'm a part of yours. That much will always be true."

This really hits home. Regardless of the label for their relationship, regardless of the details of the boundaries of their relationship, Troi is affirming for Riker that they are important enough to each other, that he is important enough to her, that she will stay in his life and keep him in hers. In a way this touches on what was established way back "Haven". The characterizations were still being sorted out to a large extent, but when Troi was due to be married Riker thought he was losing her and Troi ask him "i am no longer imzadi to you?" But even as much as they love each other, Riker isn't taking for granted that Troi will stay in his life once he becomes involved with someone. Troi is assuring him, promising to him, that she will stay. And the fact that Riker went to her, to tell her about him and Soren, was his way of demonstrating to Troi that she is still important to him, and that he wants to keep her in his life too.

Props to Riker for protecting Soren. Not only did he keep her secret he tried to help her preserve it.

This is a really good and impassioned speech that, even though its clearly about legislation against homosexuality, doesn't feel over the top like a lot of star trek speeches can. It's probably one of the better speeches not given by Picard.

This is the second episode in a row Riker has gone to Picard for guidance...kind of.

It's kind of sweet that Worf offers as a friend to help Riker jeopardize his career, for the sake of someone important to him, even though he doesn't like or understand the J'naii.

In the end, the Enterprise must maintain its status quo, so much like "The Host", there had to be a reason then love interest cannot stay. Even if the reason is honestly so disheartening and sad. I genuinely believe Riker cared for Soren, and this is so devastating. This was probably the best single episode relationship in terms of development.

Picard is so gentle and subtle with Riker.

Engage (!)