words

Dear Liberal Allies – what your college courses on oppression didn’t tell you

Tue, 08 Jan 2013 03:46:45 -0500

iaquariuschicken:

trungles:

I’m not angry or upset about anything in particular at the moment, but I thought I’d take a little time to write something out that had been bugging me about allies. It’s certainly not all-encompassing or totally comprehensive, but I hope it’s something I’ve been thinking about in terms of being a good ally and a good neighbor, especially here on Tumblr.

Before you step in to help us out, I’d just like to clarify a couple things.

You and I, we may have taken the same seminars and maybe even read the same Audre Lorde excerpts or Ronald Takaki books, but know this: we learned very different things in very different ways

For students of color, for gay students, for trans* students, for the children of immigrants and refugees, these classes aren’t always about learning new concepts when it pertains to us. It’s more about learning the names of things we already knew fairly intimately. Do you understand that? You learned it another way. You went in, you got this set of key words and a list of definitions. Your learning was, in all likelihood, “Here is this word. This is what this word means.”

For you, it was “Xenophobia: a strong fear or dislike of people from other countries.”

For us, it was “Xenophobia: the time that boy in my kindergarten class spat on me because I couldn’t speak English yet. Or when I saw that clerk yell at my mom in the grocery store because her English wasn’t clear enough. Or when USCIS had us confirm our American citizenship with the same set of papers seven times over the course of sixteen years because they wanted to confirm that we were, in fact, actual American citizens.”

For you, it was, “Racism: unfair treatment of people who belong to another race; violent behavior towards them.”

For us, it was, “Racism: that one time I saw that manager tell that sales girl to follow my dad around at Kohl’s. Or that one time my neighbor’s kid got shot by the police and they tried to cover it up by convincing everyone he was in a gang because he was Hmong, but we knew he wasn’t. Or that one time my dad told me I shouldn’t rollerblade to the library because I’m not white and it’s not safe for me.”

For you, it was, “Homophobia: a strong dislike or fear of homosexual people.”

For us, it was, “Homophobia: that time in the sixth grade when Ryan shoved against a glass door and banged my face in it while yelling, ‘faggot!’ at me until the teacher stopped him. Or when my Catholic high school’s president told me that, though he loved me as a child of God, he still believed I was sinful when I suggested that we start a GSA.”

For you, it was: “Classism: prejudice or discrimination based on social class.”

For us, it was: “Classism: that one time when my best friend came over to hang out in high school and her parents didn’t want her to come over again because they didn’t like our neighborhood. Or that one time when your friends had no idea what food stamps looked like and you were too embarrassed to explain what they were.”

So while you were learning that these academically-framed phenomena were real problems, we were just getting little figurative nametags for awful things that we already knew. Your weekly vocabulary list was, to us, just a hollow shadow of our lived experiences.

So my point is this:

If you didn’t live an experience, then step aside. Because we knew this stuff before our professors told us what to call it. We learned it from the bottom up, you learned it from the top down, and that’s not even a metaphor.

When you step out of class, you get to be like, “Oh, awesome. I am learning how to be a good ally and a better human being. This will help me.” For us, it’s more like, “Ah, so that’s what they’re calling it nowadays. When exactly did they say change was going to come for us?”

So in practice, here’s what all this theory looks like: you don’t always have to speak. I mean, certainly, you should totally call someone out on their oppressive bullshit. But if you identify as male, you don’t get to tell people what is best for women as though you have that authority. If you’re white, you shouldn’t be trying to “uplift” people of color by the grace of your intellect or your words. Nobody’s looking to be ‘rescued’ or ‘pulled up from out of their unfortunate circumstances’ as you may be tempted to believe.

All anybody’s looking for in an ally is someone who knows that “empowerment” means taking a step aside in a place where you know you have privilege. And if it is, for example, a PoC-to-PoC conversation, a woman-to-woman conversation, a queer-to-queer conversation, etc. about this stuff, and that isn’t who you are, you don’t need to be chiming in.

Just take our word for it, let us talk, and let us vent. We’d like you to give us room, and if you have to be helpful, then help make room for us by giving up some of your proverbial social girth.

Because the bottom line is that our academia has made a commodity of our lived experiences as teaching moments for you. And if you think your academic knowledge is more valid than our lived experiences, then you’re definitely not part of the solution.

Much love.

Yes. Everyone should read this. Everyone.

THIS.

theongreyjoy: Where does Walt and Jess’s relationship go from here?Gilligan: That last scene had a...

Wed, 05 Sep 2012 04:37:20 -0400

theongreyjoy:

Where does Walt and Jess’s relationship go from here?
Gilligan: That last scene had a very nostalgic and bittersweet feel … and it feels like a goodbye scene between those two characters. … Jesse is coming into his own. He was much less an assistant and more of a partner [this season] … The partnership does seem to be fractured; there’s no repairing the fracture

[x]

aboutmaleprivilege: Male privilege is oversexualizing a normal part of a woman’s body to the point...

Wed, 05 Sep 2012 00:43:13 -0400

aboutmaleprivilege:

Male privilege is oversexualizing a normal part of a woman’s body to the point where she is punished for wearing a pair of shorts at school. They are legs and they get me where I need to go. I don’t “display” them for your enjoyment, I just made a mistake by assuming that partially exposing an appropriate part of my body on an 80 degree day wouldn’t land me in detention.

I Bloom Blaum: Steven Moffat is a Douchebag - The Masterlist

Mon, 03 Sep 2012 16:45:08 -0400

I Bloom Blaum: Steven Moffat is a Douchebag - The Masterlist :

feministwhoniverse:

I have created this list because, whilst the occasional quote here and there containing problematic statements is easy to write off as ‘words being taken out of context’, seeing all of these quotes, articles, tweets, as well as some meta on major characters written by…

I Bloom Blaum: Giving Up On Doctor Who (Why I Hated 'Asylum Of The Daleks')

Mon, 03 Sep 2012 16:35:47 -0400

I Bloom Blaum: Giving Up On Doctor Who (Why I Hated 'Asylum Of The Daleks'):

leakynews:

Editor’s Note: Musician Alex Day brings us yet another reaction editorial, this time for the Doctor Who Season 7 Premier. He goes all out with both his opinions and explanation thereof, so it suffices to say - SPOILERS.

A while back, I wrote a post here on LeakyNews about…

stormcages: there’s nothing you can do. #I’ve always imagined...

Fri, 31 Aug 2012 04:45:18 -0400

stormcages:

there’s nothing you can do.

#I’ve always imagined that it’d be the ponds who would tell doctor about river going to the library #he’d visit them and they’d talk about all the things they’ve been up to #and suddenly rory would say ‘oh and river is a professor now!’ #and amy would clap her hands and say ‘yes! and she’s going to this expedition now. she’s going to a planet made of books! how cool is that?’ #and doctor would say ‘goodbye’ to them and he’d go to the TARDIS and he’d try run away from this #but then he’d spy that there’s his old screwdriver laying on the console #his old but improved screwdriver. and he’d understand that you just cannot run from everything. #so he’d go to his favourite barber to get a new haircut #and once he’d be back he’d find a new suit in his wardrobe #he’d put it on and he’d find the bowtie river loves the most #and he’d set the coordinates to her new house (because she’s out of prison and she has a house now) #he’d land without the noise to surprise her #and he’d knock on her door and he’d greet her with ‘hello wife’ or something equally cheesy #so that she’d know that he is her doctor. her husband. #and he’d say that he’s taking her to see the singing towers and she wouldn’t believe him at first #because she’d asked him to take her there for a long time and he’d never wanted to do that #she’d ask him why now and what changed his mind #and he’d only smile and tell her to get dressed and hurry up ‘because we cannot miss it river’#and they don’t miss it #they go and see the singing towers and river is so happy and grateful that he finally took her there #the towers sing and the doctor cries #because he knows that this is the end for him #and he knows that soon - very soon; too soon - he’ll send her to her death #he’ll send her to the version of himself that does not know her; the version that will shout at her and distrust her #the version of him that does not love her while she loves him with her whole heart (via your-bespoke-psychopath)

times when jaime lannister was in love with brienne of tarth

Fri, 31 Aug 2012 04:02:13 -0400

barbreyryswells:

rumbelleandstark:

crayjoy:

emily84:

crayjoy:

andhairgrowsback:

Oh, did you want us to fill in the list? Okay cool, I’ll start:

When instead of letting her die, he jumped into a bear pit weaponless (and one-handed) to save her.

^^^^^ THIS!!!!

Plus

When they reach King’s Landing at last they find Loras waiting to have Brienne executed (brat still blames Brienne for Renly’s death) and Jaime has a long talk with him and convinces him Brienne might be innocent

when Cersei gets jealous that Jaime might care for Brienne

when Jaime gives her Oathkeeper as a gift; he, the Kingslayer, names the fucking sword Oathkeeper and gives it to her. he has never had this kind of respect for anyone in battle since basically Rhaegar.

or (actual fucking quotes, so):

“I am grateful, but…you were well away. Why come back?”

A dozen quips came to mind, each crueler than the one before, but Jaime only shrugged. “I dreamed of you,” he said.

he actually dreamed of her. he who has not cared for another living woman besides Cersei.

“Blue is a good color on your, my lady,” Jaime observed. ”It goes well with your eyes.” She does have astonishing eyes.

Brienne glanced down at herself, flustered. ”Septa Donyse padded out the bodice, to give it that shape. She said you sent her to me.” She lingered by the door, as if she meant to flee any second. ”You look…”

“Different?” He managed a half-smile. ”More meat on the ribs and fewer lice in my hair, that’s all. The stump’s the same. Close the door and come here.”

She did as he bid her. ”The white cloak…”

“…is new, but I’m sure I’ll soil it soon enough.”

“That wasn’t… I was about to say that it becomes you.”

Plus, well, JAIME AND BRIENNE’s characterization in general, duh. This shit is canon in the books, it’s not made up. It’s part of Jaime’s development to bond with a person, Brienne, so diametrically opposed to what Cersei is/represents to him, with a set of beliefs so different from his own. The result is that she mellows her hard Ned-esque rigid black-and-white views, and he learns more about what it means to be true to someone and keeping an oath.

And you’re in denial if you can’t see it.

^ Rereblogging for that perfect addition.

#the pressed jaime x cersei shippers are the best

Photo

Thu, 30 Aug 2012 01:08:49 -0400

"The fundamental difference between the 19th century romantic novels and the contemporary romances..."

Wed, 29 Aug 2012 06:17:32 -0400

““The fundamental difference between the 19th century romantic novels and the contemporary romances that borrow heavily from them is in the self-possession of the heroines. Although the unmarried and all but dowerless Elizabeth Bennet and the orphan governess Jane Eyre are in positions of greater social vulnerability than their contemporary counterparts, neither 19th-century heroine is willing to sacrifice self-respect in order to gain financial security or love. …By contrast, the scenes in which Bella Swan and Anastasia Steele literally fall at the heroes’ feet and rely on the heroes’ strength to stand foreshadow each heroine’s willingness to stay in a relationship with a man whose dominance overwhelms her sense of self, and without whom she seems lost.””

- Kristina Deffenbacher, Professor of English at Hamline University in Saint Paul, Minnesota: http://www.popmatters.com/pm/feature/159709-lesser-shades-of-jane/#.UCHs_6LE1jI.facebook

(via cmtilney)

What 19th century romance novelists were doing, which most modern ones are not, is very carefully examining, discussing and criticising the world around them in a conversation that was almost entirely held between women. Novelists during this period, especially romance novelists, were almost exclusively women, as were their readers. Men were still expected to read and write poetry if they were going to read and write any kind of art, because poetry was the higher art form, and also accessible only through the classical education that was denied to most women at the time. So women wrote (and read) novels, which were derided as ‘low’ forms of entertainment until men like Walter Scott and Charles Dickens came along and legitimised the medium by writing the first ‘historical’ and ‘state of the nation’ novels.

Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice is probably one of the subtlest and smartest critiques of the way women like Elizabeth Bennett - self-possessed, opinionated, well-read, passionate - were portrayed in the media in the late 18th and early 19th century. A young, ‘over’-educated woman with opinions of her own was probably the most derided figure in the medium, soundly mocked as utterly self-deluded, ugly, undesirable, raised by fools and liked only by fools; at best she’d end up eventually repenting all her previous opinions and meekly settling down to spinsterhood, at worst she’d end up dying tragically by the end of the novel whilst its real heroine, a stereotypical feminine angel, married happily having surrendered herself entirely to her husband. Pride and Prejudice turned this formula on its head, making Elizabeth the desirable heroine because of her opinions, her education, her self-possession, and fiercely criticising the idea that a woman who gives up her entire self to (the idea of) a man/a marriage, can ever be truly happy (see, Mrs Bennett, and Charlotte, even Lydia).

In essence, the original, great romance novelists of the late 18th and early 19th century, were doing their best to engage with and subvert the problems they saw for women in particular in the world around them, especially in the ‘pop culture’ of the age, commentating in the only medium available to them. The current generation are interested only in pandering to popular culture, not taking it apart and shaking it up and calling out its bullshit - and therein lies the problem.

(via gnimaerd)

For my fellow writers:

Mon, 27 Aug 2012 23:31:32 -0400

sheg0:

yeahwriters - lots of prompts, images, quotes and motivation

writeworld - prompts, quotes, references, tips

fuckyeahcharacterdevelopment - character, plot development and vocabulary tips

writingprompts - amazing and original picture prompts

dictionaryofobscuresorrows - words you might not know and their meaning

wordjournal - more words

shannahmcgill - writing tips

archetypesandallusions - creative writing tips

kingdomjournalist - writing tips (not only how to write but also how to prepare emotionally)

livewritedream - bit of everything (prompts, tips)

mooderino - concise and to the point questions that help you build characters and stories

thewritershelpers - quotes, advice, book/author recommendations

writingquotes - what the url suggests

get-scribbling - prompts

writing-problems - to know you are not alone in your struggles

underhanded generosity: Teen Wolf and the Classical Elements

Mon, 20 Aug 2012 04:56:14 -0400

underhanded generosity: Teen Wolf and the Classical Elements:

alocalband:

(Or, How Next Season will be the Year of Stiles)

So I have this theory that Teen Wolf is doing something really interesting in regards to the symbolism of the classical five elements and how the show uses those elements within their storytelling. It’s more than just the fact…

vedlington: so what’s with all the outrage in the breaking bad...

Wed, 15 Aug 2012 19:21:25 -0400

vedlington:

so what’s with all the outrage in the breaking bad tags?

people are bitching about walter white being a sympathetic portrayal of a privileged white male drug dealer. now, while i understand why that particular trope is so problematic — do you even watch this show?

breaking bad has never been about a poor white man falling victim to a broken system and trying to beat that system through any means necessary. no no no no no. no. that’s only the story that walt tells himself and anyone who will listen to him. the system was only broken for him because he blatantly sabotaged it, quitting his job and turning down help left and right. he shot down every safeguard he had in order to protect his choice.

and that’s the real point of breaking bad. walt made a choice in the chaos after he found out he had cancer and realized he had nothing to lose.

he chose to be evil.

the joke is that walt was always evil. he always wanted to be a drug dealer. he always wanted to tell his boss to go fuck himself. he always wanted to tell his wife to climb out of his ass. but it wasn’t until that moment that he had the balls to act on any of those things, so he took that chance and ran with it.

straight off a cliff.

into a pit of fucking evil.

and if you pay attention, you can even see how walt creates chaos once things start to settle down. remission? lots of money? absolutely ideal set-up with gus? he does something reckless and things go to hell again. why does he do this? because he is completely in denial and sees himself as a victim of circumstance, so he needs to recreate the circumstance — chaos — in which he’s “allowed” to be heisenberg.

i mean fuck. heisenberg created the uncertainty principle, guys. it’s a clue.

if people don’t realize how manipulative and evil and unsympathetic walt is by now then i just don’t even know what to say. i adore him, but only as the brilliant unapologetic self-deceptive badass villian that he is. he is not the victim. he even says so himself, remember?

“i am the danger.”

tl;dr: please find another reason to hate breaking bad.

that has been devin’s rant of the day.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/07/30/breaking-bad-hazard-pay-review

Wed, 15 Aug 2012 19:10:25 -0400

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/07/30/breaking-bad-hazard-pay-review

highlanderhufflepuffhugmachine: One thing I really LOVE about...

Tue, 14 Aug 2012 15:30:26 -0400

highlanderhufflepuffhugmachine:

One thing I really LOVE about Katara is that she’s a woman who really OWNS her anger.

Like, girls are taught to never get angry. Never be rude. Don’t yell. It makes you unlikable. It’s not lady-like.

And Katara just says fuck you to that. She’s sweet, and mothering, and caring, and nurturing almost all the time. But when she’s angry? She’s ANGRY. And she OWNS it.

She yells at people, she threatens people. Sometimes she’s vain and jealous on top of it all too, and she owns up to that. It takes a special kind of courage and strength to look someone in the eye and honest to god YELL at them.

Especially the fight above. Paku is an elder, a man in charge. He’s in a privileged position of power over her. And Katara doesn’t take that shit anyway.

God damn A+ Female empowerment right there.

fuckyeahstilesderek: #it’s not often you can pinpoint the exact...

Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:50:07 -0400

fuckyeahstilesderek:

#it’s not often you can pinpoint the exact moment when one person starts loving another#but this comes pretty close

theongreyjoy: houch: I really don’t accept the idea or justification that Britta’s sudden change...

Fri, 10 Aug 2012 22:20:36 -0400

theongreyjoy:

houch:

I really don’t accept the idea or justification that Britta’s sudden change of character (especially in the third season) is due to the “pulling down of her apparent facade she’s created and showing the study group who she really is, and being comfortable”. It’s a cop out.

I think there is some merit, but also…not. As many people know, I spent a long time defending Britta’s personality change…right up to ABOUT the second half of season 3.

I do think on some level, her coolness was a facade, as you can see cracks of her real personality in the later episodes of season one, Especially during her “cancer” monologue.

BUT you can only take that so far. Despite being less secure and a bit more goofy than she originally let off, Britta is still a reasonably intelligent, strong willed character that could EASILY see through bullshit and had a reasonable amount of self respect. And I loved her for that. How often do you find a female character that is comedic and awkward (relatable to a lot of us ladies) but still strong, extremely flawed, “impure”, and well written? Britta was so great to me, especially during season 2, because she managed to be more than just a comedic device or a trope. Her stupidity and cluelessness can NOT be brushed off. You can’t have a character as dumb as season 3 Britta and then try to argue that she was just faking being a functional, adult human being for two seasons. If Troy all of the sudden got as sharp as season 1-2 Britta (snarky, logical, can see through people’s shit, didn’t act like he was 10 years old for longer than 4 minutes at a time) people would probably agree that it is OOC and unrealistic.

Now I am one of Dan’s biggest fans, but let’s be honest here. He changed Britta because he and Gillian found that the more doofy they made her, the more positively the fans responded to her, and the more fun it was for Gillian. They can be quoted expressing this sentiment MANY, MANY times. This is not a secret. Anybody who has kept with with interviews from both of them know this.

Britta’s season 3 changes were not (unlike the other characters) based off of a well planned and constantly developing story arc, but rather, a ploy for laughs and likability. Gillian likes doing that kind of comedy and she is good at it, so that’s what they decided to do with her.

I found 3x15 to be sort of the tipping point for Britta’s character assassination. Here is a post I made in which I react to the episode and all of the changes that I found to be out of character within less than 30 minuts of programming. For reference: This is the episode where Britta is texting her ex boyfriend.

- She apparently only likes guys who are unavailable/mean to her, but during season 1 when Jeff was basically all about her and spent every episode trying to date her, she was falling for him/reciprocated those feelings.

- Same with Vaughn. He was a REALLY nice guy and she adored him. The only reason they stopped dating is because he dumped her. In fact, given she and Vaughn actually dated and he is more or less the opposite of the traits described as ones Britta is attracted to, i’d say that we just subverted several seasons of canon.

- Troy has always been an ass to her. Not a “cute” ass, but basically responding to everything she does with a “go away you are obnoxious no seriously”, and it’s never attracted her. It just makes her sad and upset. Actually, the only times she ever seems interested in him seem to be when he is nicest to her.

So the way she was falling over Blade and then recoiled back at the first nice message she got? It was…to be as frank as possible..bullshit. Britta likes when people are nice to her, and she’s responded to it positively in regards to romance in the past.

I am sort of annoyed that every time they want to do one of those random Troy/Britta episodes, they manipulate her character like this and beat her down with these extreme and completely weird personality traits relating to how she relates to men. She grows traits that she never has in normal episodes.

This happened in “Wine Tasting” as well. She goes from being broken to completely dysfunctional with no ability to navigate love and romance at all. That is just not who Britta is. It never was and it never will be. If they are going to go the Troy/Britta route, I don’t see why they have to turn it into some kind of gimmick that deliberately fucks with Britta’s character.

Like oh yeah, the reason she and Troy haven’t gotten together is because he is “too nice” to her. He isn’t at all the one leading the “let’s make fun of Britta” train at all.

And don’t get me wrong..I love Troy, but I hate the way he treats Britta in every episode besides their weird OOC romance episodes, and even huge fans of him should be able to admit that he isn’t very nice to her.

It’s like these episodes are completely removed from the actual storyline and the way these characters normally act. I am a multi shipper at heart and I might be able to get behind this pairing if it wasn’t the ONE thing about Community that always results in shoddy writing. I know Britta is a wildcard, but this was some serious Glee-esque character writing. She was just….off for that entire episode. My bb is better than that. I am the biggest Britta stan that exists and I can say with full honesty that if she was the way she was in that episode all of the time, I would hate her.

The rational for season 3 seemed to consist of two things. “Let’s make the Troy/Britta ship happen, and “Let’s turn Britta into a more “likable”, comedic character.

Unfortunately, by doing both of these things, it erased a HUGE part of Britta that make her my previous favorite character of all time…that being that despite how weird she could be, she was still a multi dimensional character with several layers to her personality and represented one of the most realistic portrayals of a woman I have ever seen on TV. At this point she really just feels like another trope to her. While the rest of the characters grow and change and evolve and have story lines based on their personal struggles, Britta has more or less become a joke.

I’ve seen the arguments that come from the other side, about how season 3 is “the real her” and that she is “totally growing”, and really. Just. I love this show and I know that we fans almost NEVER criticize it and react poorly when people do, but I don’t think I will ever be okay with this. I’ve written about and invested myself in Britta Perry more than any person i’ve ever met and season 3 made me abandon her completely, and that depresses the hell out of me.

I prepare for the shitstorm I am likely to have just unleashed on myself.

Thirteen Instances of Caring: or, Why Mycroft Holmes is an Amazing Big Brother

Thu, 09 Aug 2012 17:42:11 -0400

shaddicted:

ibelieveinmycroft:

Mycroft Holmes bears the brunt of a lot of anger, both on our screens and off it. I understand; he’s a difficult character to get along with. We are given no black and white reason to like him. Sherlock, our titular character and protagonist, has an extremely antagonistic relationship with him. And the nature of narrative is that one is usually expected to side with the hero, so we side with Sherlock in their sibling war.

However, we cannot asses them and their fraternal bond in the same way we would ordinary people. The Holmes brothers, through an unpredictable quirk in genetics, have been gifted a strange and special kind of genius. Because of it, they are both difficult, damaged human beings who have trouble communicating on an emotional level. Both are so similar, each the only one really capable of understanding the other perfectly; and yet, I also think that this makes them more liable to misunderstand the other too. And, for the same reasons we sympathise with Sherlock’s anti-social bite and bile, we must pause to reassess Mycroft.

It’s easy to see why Sherlock does not get along with his brother. Mycroft is controlling and secretive and more than a little sinister. He has an enormous amount of wealth, privilege and influence that he exerts to keep tabs on his wayward little brother. He’s undemonstrative, he’s prosaic. Sometimes his behaviour is both morally and emotionally vague.

But are we to interpret these as the actions of a Machiavellian puppet-master, out to control his brother as though he were an asset to utilise or a weapon to be deployed? I’m not convinced; for this to be the case Mycroft’s every action would have to be a manipulation, and this simply doesn’t ring true. Furthermore, this would require Sherlock to continue a willing association with a brother solely out to control him – apart from anything else, this is an interpretation that doesn’t give our ever-perceptive hero much credit. The truth is likely more complex. Because, while Mycroft never allows Sherlock beyond the locus of his control, perhaps there is good reason for that. Their shared past has been left hazy, but what little we do know, such as Sherlock’s past addiction problems, indicate the rationale for Mycroft’s over protectiveness. There have been problems he does not want to see repeated, so uses his resources to help avert them. Sherlock pushes back against this, as well a grown man might, but never hard enough to actually push his brother away - it is in concession to his brother, a reluctant acknowledgement that maybe, just maybe, Brother Knows Best.

Ultimately, Mycroft gives a lot more than he takes. Although he says that caring is not an advantage, Mycroft can’t seem to stop. They are brothers; they have grown up and grown apart, and don’t really fit into each other’s worlds very well anymore, but brothers they remain. Maybe sometimes Mycroft takes it too far; he is a Holmes, after all. By virtue of their troubled intellect, their relationship is so much push and pull – a descent into childishness at one moment, an ascent onto a philosophical plane the next. But what permeates every facet of their sibling rivalry is the compassion and concern. The love there is quite real. It’s complicated and painful, as love often is, but never doubt its authenticity.

Although his role in The Reichenbach Fall may still be up for discussion (I’ll send you back here for my theories on that), Mycroft’s every other appearance on screen demonstrates a persistent, attentive and cautiously administered care on the part of the elder Holmes.

Reading Mycroft Holmes is difficult; maybe some of this is conjectural, born of reading between the lines and assuming double-meanings. But we’re Sherlockians, it’s what we do.

I’m afraid I’ve written another enormous thing, so please see under the cut:

1) A Study in Pink, The Warehouse

Read More

What a great analysis, mine fades in comparison but I am happy I made the same insights about Holmes brothers’ relationship.

If anybody is curious, here is my humble take on this amazing character. http://shaddicted.tumblr.com/post/13604114531/a-study-in-mycroft

It was written before the second season, before BELG and the morgue scene happened but I decided not to update my piece. I am just happy that I was right all along (except for the point I missed that Mycroft brings cases to Sherlock when he has no cases thus trying to prevent him from resorting to other means of alleviating boredom).

The Tale of Heisenberg

Wed, 08 Aug 2012 18:18:24 -0400

victorsmanreaction:

Breaking Bad is a really fucked up show. I’m getting better at introductions I promise. As expressed in my post about Jesse Pinkman (plugging this will never get old alright) BB is extremely corrupt. The two main characters are not your typical heroes. As a matter of fact, in the case of Walter White, I don’t think he’s much of a hero at all. This is the part where I warn you about spoiling the show for you (seriously FINISH THE SHOW BEFORE YOU READ OR ELSE DON’T BITCH AT ME YO).

Read More

How 'breaking bad' broke Jesse Pinkman

Wed, 08 Aug 2012 18:18:10 -0400

victorsmanreaction:

This is another one of my unnecessarily long posts about television. It is about Jesse Pinkman (don’t click if you don’t want spoilers obviously). I am tagging Aaron Paul because there’s a small section I dedicate to talking about his kickass acting. If you’re looking for sexy pictures of his cat puzzle I sadly can’t help you.

Read More

madmenhattan: Mad Men: The Cast Picks Their Own “Zou Bisou...

Mon, 06 Aug 2012 20:34:01 -0400

madmenhattan:

Mad Men: The Cast Picks Their Own “Zou Bisou Bisou”

During a surprise 40th birthday party for Don (Jon Hamm), his new bride Megan (Jessica Pare) treated him to a sultry rendition of “Zou Bisou Bisou.” A digital download of Pare’s version of the song, which was originally recorded by British actress and pop star Gillian Hills, is now available on iTunes and a limited edition vinyl is available on AMCtv.com.

To help us get the catchy tune out of our heads, we asked the cast to tell us what songs theymight break into after a few too many Old Fashioneds.

Jon Hamm (Don Draper): “I don’t know. I am much like Don in the sense [that] I don’t really want to get on a table and do anything like that. I don’t need to be the center of attention. And I can’t sing anymore. My voice is so shot.

Jared Harris (Lane Pryce): ”I wouldn’t do the little dance moves, but I love karaoke. In fact, [recently] I was down at Fontana’s doing live-band punk rock heavy metal karaoke. It was St. Patrick’s Day, so I did ‘Whiskey in the Jar.’ My go-to would be ‘Delilah’ or ‘Thunder Road’ or ‘Life on Mars’ or ‘Fat-Bottom Girls.’

John Slattery (Roger Sterling): ”Oh my God, the couple of times I’ve done karaoke I’ve woken up wincing, thinking, “Did I really do that? What song did I do?” Maybe something by The Clash, I think. Maybe a country song. What would be easiest to do, Roy Orbison?”

Vincent Kartheiser (Pete Campbell): “I don’t really do karaoke, but when I do, it’s always Harry Belafonte. I can do any of [his songs]. I can’t do them a quarter as well as the vocals of that man, of course. But any of his Caribbean songs I think you can get away with wailing a little bit and people enjoy the background music enough to allow you to survive.”

January Jones (Betty Francis): ”I’d try ‘Zou Bisou Bisou.’ I thought it was fantastic. But no, you’ll never see that from me. I cannot sing or dance, not even in a cute, funny way.”

Matthew Weiner (creator/executive producer): “‘I Touch Myself’ by The Divinyls. There would be a lot of drinks, but that’s my karaoke choice, always.”