Posts tagged with isms.
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.
“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
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.
Posey: The creator of my show always mentions, “Yeah, he’s a good actor, but he’s also ethnic. And he’s the lead of our show, so that’s going to help us.” It’s weird the way that he says it, but it’s true, and it’s cool, and I’m totally stoked.
Ugh Jeff Davis is such a toolbag.
is it just me, or is tyler throwing subtle shad the whole time?
or trying his damn best not to. P:
he totally is omg it must be so weird for him because he’s glad he’s inspiring other POC kids to become actors but then davis says shit like that about him
That part of the interview gave me serious pause, especially when Posey was right to call it weird. Then I remembered when he tweeted this:
What He Said!
As problematic of a figure as George Carlin was, when he was right, he was fucking on point <3.
‘The Lone White Gunman’ is a half-truth. They are never lone, but they are always armed. And they are always armed because America has no qualms about arming them. Arming them is, in fact, the America way—coddled and enshrined in the Constitution. White Supremacist Capitalist Heteropatriarchy prevents us from analyzing the pathology of these young white men and their sexual obsessions with weaponry, forbids us from seeing them as a part of a frightening continuum, blocks us from recognizing white male bodies as infinitely dangerous, and distracts us from seeing the American government’s complicity in their carnage.
I’ll tell you this: When I enter a public space, whether it be a movie theater, an airport. a political rally, or school grounds, I’m not really looking out for black boys or Arabs; I’m looking out for white boys.”
Son of Baldwin (via sonofbaldwin)
This is the realest shit ever. As much as it’s portrayed everywhere that POC are armed and dangerous, I will go on to say that I’ve never been worried about a POC being armed. In all my years of living (which isn’t very long), I never knew a single POC with a gun, but I knew all the white people in my life that had guns…and there are many. Maybe it’s all the pictures they take of themselves at the shooting range. But we’re worried about “Daquan with the dime bag of weed”
This was a discussion that I was trying to avoid (racially based conversations are debilitating, mentally and psychologically, and I’ve had more than my fair share of them in the past week), but I agree with this quote and the commentary above.
Brown people are branded as dangerous, unpredictable, and suspicious from the time they are born. Even when we are victims, there will always be people that will assume that we deserved to be harmed, that the end of our lives means one less menace to our society.
White people are almost always given the benefit of the doubt, the benefit of sympathy (“He seemed like a nice guy”, “I wouldn’t expect him to do something like this”, “Maybe he was just having a tough life”), even though they tend to be the very ones pulling out guns and committing mass murder in large, public spaces.
It’s confusing and angering. Not because I don’t understand it, but because its allowed to happen every single day.
I suggest all females watch this.
*i suggest all humans watch this.
If you haven’t watched this yet, you really should.
This is a must, girls and boys.
I agree that everyone should watch this. This is one of the few videos on female representation in the media that at least tries to point out that the way females are represented has a negative effect on everyone, not just women.
I love that this touches also on how media affects men, but wow. Stereotypes are perpetuated by television more than in reality, and they are so skewed because they have to be provocative or funny or any number of things that aren’t complete or real enough.
This affects not only women and men, but race, gays and lesbians, trans people, all people.
We all struggle against what we are supposed to be, what we are told we should be, and yet when positions in media and PR change, the image doesn’t. Because people get those positions by conforming to that image, and breaking out risks loss.
This is why it is so hard for anyone to be who they really are, because they are so busy being what other’s expect so as not to be harassed for not being what they are supposed to be.
Oh man, Geena Davis. I love her with all my heart.
i just hate that the correct response to “those people called me ugly and now i feel bad” is apparently “no, it’s alright because you’re beautiful!”
it’s not alright because you’re beautiful, it’s just alright. why create a situation where it’s alright because you’re beautiful and if something happens to take that away from you then it’s not alright anymore? jesus, i know people who live their life in fear of getting in a disfiguring accident - way more afraid of “disfiguring” than “dangerous”. like, “i’d rather die than come out of it looking ugly” afraid. fuck that.
new rule for my life: if someone ridicules me for being ugly the correct response is “fuck them”, as it should be. they see ugly and they can’t even control themselves enough not to say something. they see ugly and they literally cannot deal with it. i’m difficult for them to look at and they can’t even CONCEIVE of someone who exists for a reason other than looking good for them.
yo, that is the real problem here: this feeling of entitlement to how “palatable” someone is to YOUR personal tastes, not ugliness. i don’t care if you think they’re ugly on the outside or the inside. the ONLY person who should be shaped to your standards is you.
Man, I get that beauty’s great and all and other people get really into it but I wish it wasn’t the go-to compliment for women for some of these reasons.
And also that “inner beauty” wasn’t shorthand for “but you have all these positive personality traits that basically act as the equivalent of outer beauty, which, as we know, is the most important thing of all”.
No. You had sex with a girl when you were a child. It ended in pregnancy. You are attacking the morality of a 14 year old girl who terminated a pregnancy that would have resulted in a child that neither you or her had the capacity to care for. A girl that preserved your and her own youth, and stopped a child being raised in circumstances that are not fit for any child. You really should be assessing your own morality. What kind of 14 year old boy fucks a 14 year old girl, without protection, gets her pregnant and then runs an online smear campaign against her for doing what was best for her, her family and you? What? You think you had the capacity to raise a child at age 14/15? How would you feed it or look after it? You wouldn’t. You were going to dump it on her or your own parents, live like the carefree little shit you are and occasionally play with the child when you could be bothered and think “Wow, what a good, brave young father I am.” You made the mistake, she went through the trauma of saving your youth for you. You owe her so much better than this. You absolutely disgust me. Less than forward-slash three, you’re real fucking remorseful. That’s poetry that is. You’re breaking my heart kid. That girl should have every right to decide what she wants to do to her body. The idea that you should take responsibility and give birth implies that you are responsible to this fetus and you owe it something. A pregnant person does not owe a fetus anything any more than they owe you an apology for being alive. Try again, pro lifers. Pro-Choice.
I applaud this.
This is some sterling commentary.
This dumbass is also probably assuming the fetus was male. The sex is almost never known when an abortion takes place because it is early on into the pregnancy.
that commentary. fucking golden.