Welcome to my Head

This is what it's like inside My Head.
durnedscribblingwoman:

medievalpoc:

sanssouciavecmoi:

medievalpoc:

kaitlinsaysrawr:

medievalpoc:

leeandlow submitted to medievalpoc:

The Diversity Gap in the highest grossing science fiction and fantasy films. Sad, right? You can see the full study here.

 I highly recommend reading the entire article. 
from the infographic:
Among the top 100 domestic grossing films:
only 8% of films star a protagonist of color
of the 8 protagonists of color, all are men; 6 are played by Will Smith and 1 is a cartoon character (Aladdin)
0% of protagonists are women of color
0% of protagonists are LGBTQ
1% of protagonists are people with a disability

Wait a mother fucking second. Don’t start this argument with a science fiction fan. In the genre of science fiction you have to spread it much boarder than just science fiction. Because scifi can be anywhere from It’s Alive to Star Wars to Guardians of the Galaxy.
Science fiction deals with race in a way any film in today’s standards can’t even touch. Star Trek had the first biracial kiss.Star Wars has employed actors that would have never been able to receive jobs because of height. Lando owned the millennium falcon before Han! Firefly the first mate is an African American female!
You can not speak of science fiction without speaking of how ground breaking it can be in the space genre. So don’t think a chart means you truly know the facts when it seems you believe you can lump over a thousand different movies into one genre of just science fiction.
Boo ya.


I could say a lot of things here. I could try to explain to you what a “percentage” is, and how listing 5 casting decisions you consider ‘enough’ diversity don’t make much, if any, impact on the overall numbers. Especially ones from forty plus years ago.
I could point out that you’re talking about TV shows as well, which aren’t a part of what this chart ^^ is measuring, which is the Top 100 Domestic Grossing Sci Fi and Fantasy Films, which is clearly states at the top.
I could try and interpret the, uh, sentence: “In the genre of science fiction you have to spread it much boarder than just science fiction.” as meaning analyzing genres beyond Science Fiction, like Fantasy, which is included in the chart. Once again, big block letters “& FANTASY” at the top of the chart. Not only that, if you want to “spread it boarder”, the article already has that covered:

This is not an isolated incident, but a wide reaching societal problem.
Read more Diversity Gap studies on:
The Academy Awards
The Tony Awards
The Emmy Awards
The children’s book industry
The New York Times Top 10 Bestseller List
US politics

But the real gist of what you are saying is that I or anyone who criticizes the SFF genre for lacking racial diversity isn’t a real fan, and that we should be satisfied with whatever bit parts (Lando and Ewoks?? Are you kidding??) and token representation actors of color are cast in.
If you ask me, “real fans” of the genre believe that it is capable of better, and can survive and thrive on our critical consumption of it. If the sciences exist because of inquiry, research, and analysis, why wouldn’t science fiction do the same? After all, if something is to become a reality, it must first be imagined.


They tried to use Firefly, a show that uses an entire culture as a backdrop for a space drama and two characters with the surname Tam who are not Chinese, to tell people that we should be grateful for scraps from Joss Whedon, who is not actually a feminist writer or producer. Who are they kidding?

1. I am a huge fan of Firefly/Serenity
2. I agree with this so hard it needs an onomatopoeia

And that’s how you consume media critically.

Off topic, but this discussion tweaked on some thoughts I’ve been having about Joss Whedon and how he’s been hailed uncritically as a Feminist writer and producer and director because he writes active, physically strong female leads when, actually, he’s really not Feminist in the way he uses those leads.
Let me start by saying that I was and am a huge Buffy/Angel fan. I cannot express how much these shows meant to me, how much I adored them, what a difference they made to me during a difficult period of my life (my mid to late teens). BUT. That show is fucking awful to the female characters. The treatment of female as opposed to male characters is startling when you look at it in retrospect. Female characters are infinitely more disposable than male.
Angel? Left and got his own show. Spike? Left, came back, left, came back and left again ad nauseum. Riley? Left and came back then left again. Oz? Left and came back and left again. Giles? Left and came back. Wesley? Left and got his own show.
Now let’s look at female characters who bore roughly equal importance within the story as love interests, friends, or allies.
Jenny? Dead. Kendra? Dead. Joyce? Dead. Tara? Dead. Cordelia? Dead. Anya? Dead. Fred? Dead.
Every time that Joss really needed to hammer in a message about tragedy, hopelessness or darkness, the first tool he reached for was fridging the female. Did a beloved MALE character ever die in Buffy or Angel in order to increase the emotional stakes, tension, or sense of peril? No. The only time a male main character died for good in either show was Doyle, and that was because the actor was leaving, and they needed to get shot of the character fast. Generally, even when you thought one of the guys had died, they would come back, like Angel, and be fully reintegrated into the plot.
Female characters who died only got to return briefly as avatars of evil, such as Jenny being used as the face of Buffy’s most dangerous enemy, the First Evil, Cordelia’s stint as the mother of Jasmine (and then for one further episode as herself, before dying again). Fred’s *actress* got to stay, but her soul got ripped to shreds so finally that there was no hope she’d ever return, and her body was left as the host for an evil goddess who later turned out to be not so bad, really, apart from that whole… murdering Fred, thing.
What I’m saying here isn’t that Joss Whedon is an evil, terrible, no good misogynist. What I’m saying is that we shouldn’t so easily accept a male creator as a force for Feminism when his work displays such a stereotypical disregard for the female characters.
Other factors to consider:
The Goddamn infuriating Nice Guy Xander Harris, who slut-shames, assaults, judges, and dumps his way through the female cast and is still somehow billed as the series’ ‘heart’.
The way that female sexuality is consistently punished. Buffy has sex with Angel = Angel turns evil and tries to kill everything she loves. Oz and Willow shown having sex = Oz turns feral and leaves her. Willow and Tara get back together and have sex = Tara dies and Willow turns evil. Buffy has a relationship with Spike = Xander shames her and then victim-blames her when Spike assaults her. Every other relationship Buffy has = Buffy gets dumped and has her heart broken.
The way male sexuality is treated neutrally or rewarded. Xander sexually assaults Buffy while under magical influence and pretends to forget about it = no consequences. Xander tries to force Cordelia to love him and casts a love spell on all the women in town = no consequences. Xander has sex with Faith = no consequences. Xander jilts Anya at the alter = no consequences for Xander AT ALL OMG.
This presents, to me, a picture of a male creator who WANTS to write a Feminist show full of strong characters, female, but is so mired in the tropes and conventions of our patriarchal media that he literally cannot help himself from conforming to them without even realising it.
So basically… Joss Whedon isn’t in any position to be calling himself a Feminist. Even if he wanted to, which he doesn’t because he thinks we should call ourselves Humanists even though that completely misses the point and also already means something else anyway. *Sigh*

durnedscribblingwoman:

medievalpoc:

sanssouciavecmoi:

medievalpoc:

kaitlinsaysrawr:

medievalpoc:

leeandlow submitted to medievalpoc:

The Diversity Gap in the highest grossing science fiction and fantasy films. Sad, right? You can see the full study here.

I highly recommend reading the entire article.

from the infographic:

Among the top 100 domestic grossing films:

  • only 8% of films star a protagonist of color
  • of the 8 protagonists of color, all are men; 6 are played by Will Smith and 1 is a cartoon character (Aladdin)
  • 0% of protagonists are women of color
  • 0% of protagonists are LGBTQ
  • 1% of protagonists are people with a disability

Wait a mother fucking second. Don’t start this argument with a science fiction fan. In the genre of science fiction you have to spread it much boarder than just science fiction. Because scifi can be anywhere from It’s Alive to Star Wars to Guardians of the Galaxy.

Science fiction deals with race in a way any film in today’s standards can’t even touch.
Star Trek had the first biracial kiss.
Star Wars has employed actors that would have never been able to receive jobs because of height. Lando owned the millennium falcon before Han!
Firefly the first mate is an African American female!

You can not speak of science fiction without speaking of how ground breaking it can be in the space genre. So don’t think a chart means you truly know the facts when it seems you believe you can lump over a thousand different movies into one genre of just science fiction.

Boo ya.

image

I could say a lot of things here. I could try to explain to you what a “percentage” is, and how listing 5 casting decisions you consider ‘enough’ diversity don’t make much, if any, impact on the overall numbers. Especially ones from forty plus years ago.

I could point out that you’re talking about TV shows as well, which aren’t a part of what this chart ^^ is measuring, which is the Top 100 Domestic Grossing Sci Fi and Fantasy Films, which is clearly states at the top.

I could try and interpret the, uh, sentence: “In the genre of science fiction you have to spread it much boarder than just science fiction.” as meaning analyzing genres beyond Science Fiction, like Fantasy, which is included in the chart. Once again, big block letters “& FANTASY” at the top of the chart. Not only that, if you want to “spread it boarder”, the article already has that covered:

This is not an isolated incident, but a wide reaching societal problem.

Read more Diversity Gap studies on:

The Academy Awards

The Tony Awards

The Emmy Awards

The children’s book industry

The New York Times Top 10 Bestseller List

US politics

But the real gist of what you are saying is that I or anyone who criticizes the SFF genre for lacking racial diversity isn’t a real fan, and that we should be satisfied with whatever bit parts (Lando and Ewoks?? Are you kidding??) and token representation actors of color are cast in.

If you ask me, “real fans” of the genre believe that it is capable of better, and can survive and thrive on our critical consumption of it. If the sciences exist because of inquiry, research, and analysis, why wouldn’t science fiction do the same? After all, if something is to become a reality, it must first be imagined.

image

They tried to use Firefly, a show that uses an entire culture as a backdrop for a space drama and two characters with the surname Tam who are not Chinese, to tell people that we should be grateful for scraps from Joss Whedon, who is not actually a feminist writer or producer. Who are they kidding?

1. I am a huge fan of Firefly/Serenity

2. I agree with this so hard it needs an onomatopoeia

image

And that’s how you consume media critically.

Off topic, but this discussion tweaked on some thoughts I’ve been having about Joss Whedon and how he’s been hailed uncritically as a Feminist writer and producer and director because he writes active, physically strong female leads when, actually, he’s really not Feminist in the way he uses those leads.

Let me start by saying that I was and am a huge Buffy/Angel fan. I cannot express how much these shows meant to me, how much I adored them, what a difference they made to me during a difficult period of my life (my mid to late teens). BUT. That show is fucking awful to the female characters. The treatment of female as opposed to male characters is startling when you look at it in retrospect. Female characters are infinitely more disposable than male.

Angel? Left and got his own show. Spike? Left, came back, left, came back and left again ad nauseum. Riley? Left and came back then left again. Oz? Left and came back and left again. Giles? Left and came back. Wesley? Left and got his own show.

Now let’s look at female characters who bore roughly equal importance within the story as love interests, friends, or allies.

Jenny? Dead. Kendra? Dead. Joyce? Dead. Tara? Dead. Cordelia? Dead. Anya? Dead. Fred? Dead.

Every time that Joss really needed to hammer in a message about tragedy, hopelessness or darkness, the first tool he reached for was fridging the female. Did a beloved MALE character ever die in Buffy or Angel in order to increase the emotional stakes, tension, or sense of peril? No. The only time a male main character died for good in either show was Doyle, and that was because the actor was leaving, and they needed to get shot of the character fast. Generally, even when you thought one of the guys had died, they would come back, like Angel, and be fully reintegrated into the plot.

Female characters who died only got to return briefly as avatars of evil, such as Jenny being used as the face of Buffy’s most dangerous enemy, the First Evil, Cordelia’s stint as the mother of Jasmine (and then for one further episode as herself, before dying again). Fred’s *actress* got to stay, but her soul got ripped to shreds so finally that there was no hope she’d ever return, and her body was left as the host for an evil goddess who later turned out to be not so bad, really, apart from that whole… murdering Fred, thing.

What I’m saying here isn’t that Joss Whedon is an evil, terrible, no good misogynist. What I’m saying is that we shouldn’t so easily accept a male creator as a force for Feminism when his work displays such a stereotypical disregard for the female characters.

Other factors to consider:

The Goddamn infuriating Nice Guy Xander Harris, who slut-shames, assaults, judges, and dumps his way through the female cast and is still somehow billed as the series’ ‘heart’.

The way that female sexuality is consistently punished. Buffy has sex with Angel = Angel turns evil and tries to kill everything she loves. Oz and Willow shown having sex = Oz turns feral and leaves her. Willow and Tara get back together and have sex = Tara dies and Willow turns evil. Buffy has a relationship with Spike = Xander shames her and then victim-blames her when Spike assaults her. Every other relationship Buffy has = Buffy gets dumped and has her heart broken.

The way male sexuality is treated neutrally or rewarded. Xander sexually assaults Buffy while under magical influence and pretends to forget about it = no consequences. Xander tries to force Cordelia to love him and casts a love spell on all the women in town = no consequences. Xander has sex with Faith = no consequences. Xander jilts Anya at the alter = no consequences for Xander AT ALL OMG.

This presents, to me, a picture of a male creator who WANTS to write a Feminist show full of strong characters, female, but is so mired in the tropes and conventions of our patriarchal media that he literally cannot help himself from conforming to them without even realising it.

So basically… Joss Whedon isn’t in any position to be calling himself a Feminist. Even if he wanted to, which he doesn’t because he thinks we should call ourselves Humanists even though that completely misses the point and also already means something else anyway. *Sigh*

(via rollingpenny)

azaaganaa:

Cruden bay - Aberdeenshire - Scotland - UK 

photography: Azaa Ganaa

(via kvallning)

fullten:

pushing-up-daisy:

fullten:

lost-in-hammerspace:

starbombpotter:

GUYS COLORADO NEEDS SOME HELP
There is a bill about to be passed called Amendment 67 that is the ban on ALL abortions. THIS INCLUDES IF THE MOTHER WOULD DIE OR IF SHE WAS RAPED. THIS BILL ALSO CAN MAKE POLICE INSTIGATE ALL NON-LIVE BIRTHS (MISCARRIAGE/STILLBORN).
If you want more information, the article is [here] and they have an indigogo page [here] to help fund the stop of Amendment 67.
TUMBLR PLEASE BLOW THIS UP. PLEASE IM BEGGING YOU

holy shit what the fuck Colorado!?

(taken from the news site)
Here’s what Amendment 67 would really do:
Outlaw all abortion in Colorado, even in cases of rape and incest.
Ban some of the most common and effective forms of birth control, including the Pill and IUDs.
Make it illegal for a pregnant women with cancer to choose treatment that could save her life.
Restrict options for women wanting in vitro fertilization.
Any birth that isn’t a live-birth — so miscarriages and still births — could be deemed suspicious deaths and would be investigated by police.

Is this actually real?

#it will never get passed 
it passed the house and senate by 60%, and I think a lot of women are kept uninformed about their body, and shamed into thinking their body < little freeloaders body. But I’ve seen some religious news articles that are also against this bill, which keeps me hopeful, but you never know. Congress will keep pushing bills on women, and people with vaginas in order to control our bodies and limit our choices. 

fullten:

pushing-up-daisy:

fullten:

lost-in-hammerspace:

starbombpotter:

GUYS COLORADO NEEDS SOME HELP

There is a bill about to be passed called Amendment 67 that is the ban on ALL abortions. THIS INCLUDES IF THE MOTHER WOULD DIE OR IF SHE WAS RAPED. THIS BILL ALSO CAN MAKE POLICE INSTIGATE ALL NON-LIVE BIRTHS (MISCARRIAGE/STILLBORN).

If you want more information, the article is [here] and they have an indigogo page [here] to help fund the stop of Amendment 67.

TUMBLR PLEASE BLOW THIS UP. PLEASE IM BEGGING YOU

holy shit what the fuck Colorado!?

(taken from the news site)

Here’s what Amendment 67 would really do:

  1. Outlaw all abortion in Colorado, even in cases of rape and incest.
  2. Ban some of the most common and effective forms of birth control, including the Pill and IUDs.
  3. Make it illegal for a pregnant women with cancer to choose treatment that could save her life.
  4. Restrict options for women wanting in vitro fertilization.
  5. Any birth that isn’t a live-birth — so miscarriages and still births — could be deemed suspicious deaths and would be investigated by police.

Is this actually real?

#it will never get passed 

it passed the house and senate by 60%, and I think a lot of women are kept uninformed about their body, and shamed into thinking their body < little freeloaders body. But I’ve seen some religious news articles that are also against this bill, which keeps me hopeful, but you never know. Congress will keep pushing bills on women, and people with vaginas in order to control our bodies and limit our choices. 

(via pottersrebellion)

kungfusnowqueen:

be critical of Anita Sarkeesian all you want but if the fact that she had to cancel a speech at a college because a student threatened a mass shooting isn’t a huge red flag to you about how very much alive misogyny is then you need to get the fuck out of my face

(via muonna)

sixpenceee:

sixpenceee:

perfect pictures for an imperfect world

im glad this is exploding. it’s one of the most powerful things on my blog. make it known worldwide guys. 

(Source: sixpenceee, via fenrir-kin)

At least a handful of earth for these slain bodies, for these whitened bones! A handful of earth, at least, for these unclaimed dead….
We dislike to fancy the bodies of our dear ones worm-ridden; their eyes, their lovely eyes, filled with worms; their cheeks, their kiss-deserving cheeks, mildewed; their pomegranate-like lips food for reptiles.

But here they are in the mountains, unburied and forlorn, attacked by worms and scorpions, the eyes bare, the faces horrible amid a loathsome stench, like the odor of the slaughterhouse….

There are our women with breasts uncovered and limbs bare. A handful of earth to shield their honor! There are our boys, naked and torn, with bullets in their hearts and in their heads: a handful of earth to cover them! There are our brides, disemboweled, hacked to pieces, with babies yet unborn: a heandful of earth, only, to screen from our eyes this sorrowful scene! There are our boys with feet cut away and heads battered against the stone….

Let the Armenian become a fossil. Let him be the disgrace of the civilization which tore him to pieces….Let him be the curse of the religion which abandoned him and left him without succor. Give, God, the handful of earth requested of Thee!

A Handful of Earth, Donabed Lulejian. 

"His brother Levon recalled how, after passing through a ruined village littered with the corpses of men, women, and children, Donabed found a "piece of thick window-paper" in a stable and began writing." (The Burning Tigris, Peter Balakian)

(Source: tomarza, via lord-kitschener)

notyourexrotic:


This week, India became the first Asian nation to reach Mars when its orbiter entered the planet’s orbit on Wednesday — and this is the picture that was seen around the world to mark this historic event. It shows a group of female scientists at the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) congratulating one another on the mission’s success. The picture was widely shared on Twitter where Egyptian journalist and women’s rights activist Mona El-Tahawy tweeted: “Love this pic so much. When was the last time u saw women scientists celebrate space mission?” In most mission room photos of historic space events or in films about space, women are rarely seen, making this photo both compelling and unique. Of course, ISRO, like many technical agencies, has far to go in terms of achieving gender balance in their workforce. As Rhitu Chatterjee of PRI’s The World observed in an op-ed, only 10 percent of ISRO’s engineers are female.This fact, however, Chatterjee writes, is “why this new photograph of ISRO’s women scientists is invaluable. It shatters stereotypes about space research and Indian women. It forces society to acknowledge and appreciate the accomplishments of female scientists. And for little girls and young women seeing the picture, I hope it will broaden their horizons, giving them more options for what they can pursue and achieve.” To read Chatterjee’s op-ed on The World, visit http://bit.ly/1u3fvGZPhoto credit: Manjunath Kiran/AFP/Getty Images

- A Mighty Girl

notyourexrotic:

This week, India became the first Asian nation to reach Mars when its orbiter entered the planet’s orbit on Wednesday — and this is the picture that was seen around the world to mark this historic event. It shows a group of female scientists at the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) congratulating one another on the mission’s success. 

The picture was widely shared on Twitter where Egyptian journalist and women’s rights activist Mona El-Tahawy tweeted: “Love this pic so much. When was the last time u saw women scientists celebrate space mission?” 

In most mission room photos of historic space events or in films about space, women are rarely seen, making this photo both compelling and unique. Of course, ISRO, like many technical agencies, has far to go in terms of achieving gender balance in their workforce. As Rhitu Chatterjee of PRI’s The World observed in an op-ed, only 10 percent of ISRO’s engineers are female.

This fact, however, Chatterjee writes, is “why this new photograph of ISRO’s women scientists is invaluable. It shatters stereotypes about space research and Indian women. It forces society to acknowledge and appreciate the accomplishments of female scientists. And for little girls and young women seeing the picture, I hope it will broaden their horizons, giving them more options for what they can pursue and achieve.” 

To read Chatterjee’s op-ed on The World, visit http://bit.ly/1u3fvGZ

Photo credit: Manjunath Kiran/AFP/Getty Images

- A Mighty Girl

(via brilliantfantasticgeronimo)