ask nev

knightenchanterenjolras-deactiv  asked:

I'm watching Sailor Moon for the first time and at this point (sailor moon s) the only one of the inner senshi I can really see as straight is Minako, but even then, I don't know. They seem like a bunch of bi girls, but maybe that's just wishful thinking. How do you see them?

They’re all queer. Minako may come off as straight in the anime, but in the manga she is queer as fuck. Here’s how I see them.

Usagi- bi (I was gonna say pan, but actually I do think she finds different things attractive in men, women and inbetween) and potentially eventually polyamorous

Rei- open homoromantic asexual in the manga and PGSM and probably Crystal, closeted (but will eventually come out) lesbian in the 90s anime

Ami- biromantic ace (or maybe just bi- hard to say without more evidence)

Mako- bi- tends to favor boys, but when she crushes on a girl, she crushes hard (see: Ami and Haruka)

Minako- pansexual

Haruka and Michiru- lesbian space princesses

Setsuna- bi- equal level crush on Serenity and Endymion

Hotaru- lesbian

Chibiusa- bi like mama

notoriouslyordinary  asked:

I apologize if you've been asked a similar question before, but why do you like Madoka much less now?

The main reason is Urobuchi gave an interview where he said that the girls in Madoka were carried away by their “hubris” and “self-righteousness” and compared them to the Taliban (WHAT the fuck). So that pretty much flings any idea the show was trying to say something even vaguely feminist out the window- this guy literally things young girls should be punished for wanting things. women shouldn’t have desires. REVOLUTIONARY concept.

U can still read feminist things into the show for yourself of course (as I did initially), but knowing the opposite was intended puts a damper on it for me.

And also knowing that makes me view the show in a different light. I used to be okay with it because it seemed to reconstruct the genre a bit at the end, with Madoka restoring hope etc. but…

It really is just 11 straight episodes of little girls suffering, intended for a male audience, with some sort of attempt to smooth it all over at the end so the viewer doesn’t feel guilty and it’s still implied they all die or whatever. That’s kind of creepy, when you think about it.  Especially when you consider that this is basically taking a genre meant to empower young girls and making it about little girls being tortured and manipulated. There are some genres that could use deconstruction- the magical girl genre isn’t one of them, at least not deconstructed in a way that’s targetted toward men. If it’s deconstructed, I think it should be deconstructed for a FEMALE AUDIENCE, you know, the actual main consumers of the genre. I mean, thinking about it, Madoka doesn’t really count as a deconstruction- it exaggerates tropes that were already in the genre- dark magical girl, coming of age story, etc.

Utena did a MUCH better job of criticizing shoujo tropes (like ACTUAL CRITICISM OF PROBLEMATIC shoujo tropes like the fucked-up dynamics of idealized shoujo romances, or the damsel-in-distress cliche, not just making stuff ~edgier~ and not really criticizing) while having an actual feminist message that was absolutely intended that you cannot miss, and we also know the creators actually kept the female audience in mind AND oh, it actually managed to have canon queer characters and relationships rather than just ~vaguely imply~ so straight audiences could ignore it. A lot of Madoka fans treat Madoka like it’s Utena, but it’s not. Utena is an actual deconstruction, Madoka is largely just a darknedgy take on things.

And it’s not like the magical girl genre didn’t have DARK STUFF in it, it just still managed to be…about empowering girls rather than punishing them. Princess Tutu was dark. Sailor Moon is the codifier for “dark magical girl warrior’ and “magical girl antihero” concepts and the live action serie got VERY heavy. And then people act like Madoka (and Nanoha) are the only magical girl shows with kickass fight scenes (and that’s somehow the measure of their worth) but Precure, aimed for 5 year old girls, can be ridiculously heavy on the action. I’m tired of ppl talking about how Madoka is great bc it’s got all this stuff the genre already had.

And reading spoilers for the movie, all my fears have been confirmed- the relationships and themes that made the anime work have been thrown out the window for cynicism so it’s basically worthless now. And still no canon queerness, ofc.

So yeah, I still enjoy some parts of Madoka, I’m just much less enamored with it now, mostly just in light of getting more into the magical girl genre and learning more about the creator’s true intentions.

lezbrianna  asked:

The more I read about Sailor Moon (especially from your blog) the more I realize that Madoka Magica isn't as much of a deconstruction of Magical Girl shows as TVTropes says it is. It's more of a "What if this good thing that happens in this show actually lead to this bad thing instead" and "what if the good guys aligned with our heroine had ulterior motives instead." Star Wars KotOR2 is a much more effective deconstruction bc it actually asks questions about the Jedi and the nature of the Force.

Yeah, I mean, I do like Madoka (disregarding the movie) but it isn’t a deconstruction.

For one thing, a deconstruction requires being familiar with the genre and Urobuchi has admitted he wasn’t. Like he had literally never watched any. He based Madoka off porn games, for christ’s sake.

Second, it only really goes as far as “what if the mascot was evil” which is something that has actually been explored in mg shows before (Kamikaze Kaitou Jeanne is an example. Her mascot was literally turned out to be an agent of Satan, not joking). The fact is, in most magical girl shows, the mascot merely tells the girl that she has superpowers she can unlock, rather than granting her power in exchange for something, so the whole “wishes” thing does not hold up as a deconstruction. Either that or, a la Precure, the mascot is very obviously weak and dependent on the girls for help and they help out of the goodness of their hearts.

 I guess you could argue his whole “magical girls would be isolated and fighting each other” thing counts as deconstruction, but there generally ARE loner magical girls in traditional magical girl shows who isolate themselves and conflict with the others before being helped by the power of friendship. There ARE magical girls who turn evil (ala Madoka’s witches) under the strain of whatever, they just tend to be saved. The POINT of magical girl shows is generally that the girls keep themselves from going into loneliness and despair over the shit they have to deal with by finding strength and support in each other.

 I’m not sure why the hell you’d want to “deconstruct” “female friendship is powerful” as a trope, but hey. (Like the Madoka movie literally turned the “sad girl finds redemption and strength in female friendship/strong lesbian subtext” to “WHAT A TWIST the sad girl’s friendship/crush on another girl IS OBVIOUSLY OBSESSIVE AND HORRIBLE AND BASICALLY ABUSIVE” which wow. So progressive.)

So yeah, I don’t really see it as a deconstruction but rather a dark twist on the genre, and not one that uses tropes that haven’t been done before. Is it well-written at times? Yes, the writing of the aftermath of Mami’s death always breaks my heart, as does the time travel ep. The music is fantastic. etc. But it’s not as groundbreaking as people typically act like, imo.

I’ve said it before, but Utena is what an actual deconstruction looks like- as a deconstruction of shoujo and fairy tale shit rather than any particular genre really. It doesn’t just go “okay what if it were a trick” or “what if the heroes failed” but shows how harmful it is for people to try to fit in and follow these archetypes fairy tales/shoujo lay out. 

It shows that someone who actually acts like a typical aggressive male love interest is actually really fucking terrifying when you actually think about it, and would have to be a truly shitty human being. 

It shows that trying to fit men into this narrow “prince” archetype sets them up for failure, and that men inevitably take the shame they feel over that failure out on women.

 It shows that women who are actually forced to act in the role of damsel in distress and victimized over and over again would inevitably be bitter and fucked up and be caught in a genuine abusive cycle. It shows that the problem isn’t magically  solved just because you “save” the woman in question, she needs to be able to heal, break the cycle and reclaim her agency.

To me, that’s what a deconstruction is. It exposes the underlying problems with various facets of a genre and shows how it is harmful for people to try to fit into these archetypes, how they limit and exploit the characters in question. 

I also think the best deconstructions generally show the characters truly breaking out of the roles assigned them and destroying those harmful archetypes, to show stories don’t have to be this way isn’t it so much cooler when we don’t limit ourselves? I mean, honestly, what’s the point of deconstruction if you don’t present a way the genre could improve? It’s just saying “this thing sucks” and that doesn’t help anyone. You need to show how it could break out of the same tired cliches.

Which is what Utena did. It was like “hey, we don’t have to rely on the prince and princess archetypes, hey we can just forget about the shitty male leads, hey women can save themselves, hey, isn’t this a bit better?”

Madoka…definitely did not do that, even if we’re acting like it’s a deconstruction. The magical girl system was still in place, girls were still sacrificed and some were dying because they wanted a boy to be happy, etc. So like, what was it trying to say if we’re calling it a deconstruction? “Well, this is just how it is”, I guess. 

Madoka just really didn’t tackle any of the problems with the magical girl genre or show how these archetypes are flawed. It just took tropes that were already present and hit them with an angsty stick. So no, it’s not deconstruction imho. I did see someone once argue it could be a deconstruction for male-aimed magical girl shows, but I honestly really don’t see that and again, I don’t see how it could have been that considering the writer had never watched a magical girl show, male-aimed or otherwise. 

whichwitchery  asked:

Out of curiosity, as Stephanie Brown's biggest fan, can I ask you a Steph related question? Had you had the complete power to do so, what would you have changed in pre-52 Steph's narrative. And not just the gross torture and death b/c I think we all wish that never happened, but the other stuff. Like her Spoiler days, the teenage pregnancy, relationship with Tim, her time as Robin and Batgirl, etc. If you were the writer what would you have done differently?

DUDE the amount of stuff I would change in Steph’s narrative is tremendous SO BUCKLE UP

first, I would not have had Bruce be so irrationally dickish to her, bordering on heinous. This is not just for Steph’s sake, but his as well, he was so completely unlikeable when dealing with her, The most major incident was the incident in Gotham Knights when, despite agreeing to train her, he completely vanished on her and when she tried to contact him to find what was going on, he put her through that completely cruel, elaborate test for no reason (a test she failed because she didn’t consider he was putting her through a ridiculous elaborate test for no reason) and fired her, while rubbing in the fact her dad had just died. And then pretty much confirm he didn’t trust her because her dad had been a criminal.

So like, in my ideal world, NONE of that shit would have happened. If Bruce agrees to train her, he sticks to it like a reasonable person and doesn’t fuck around with her. He treats her like a respected pupil and team member and even reveals his identity to her once they’ve worked together a while- definitely before she becomes Robin.

Then there’s Tim. In my world, the sometimes awful way Tim disrespected her would be addressed as well as the fact Steph’s low self esteem allowed it to happen. His tendency to use her real name and casually reveal her identity would have real consequences he’d have to deal with. As would his tendency to diminish her abilities. I wouldn’t have the conflict between Tim and Steph regarding him not telling her his identity be focused so much on “is he cheating on me” drama, but rather Steph slowly realizing she deserves more than having a lover who won’t trust her with his name, Tim realizing that the reason Steph agreed to such a ridiculous situation was because of self-worth issues Tim hadn’t fully seen/want to see.

I would not have had Bruce reveal Tim’s identity. I think that’s a decision that would have meant character development for Tim. Steph demanding that respect and Tim complying even if it meant defying Bruce makes their relationship far more equal.

Also, I would have addressed the class privilege Tim had over Steph- he repeatedly showed a lack of understanding of growing up poor (see the scene when he made Steph pay for the soda and went on some sort of weird “slippery slope” rant, despite the fact he’d never been  in a position where he COULDN’T pay for soda) and why her worldview was “harsher” than his, and I think this should have been addressed as source of conflict between them.

The pregnancy storyline is fine, but my version of it would have included more exploration of how it happened, since it was implied Steph was incredibly depressed and so entered a relationship with a non-great-guy. I want more exploration of that and Steph’s psychological state in general. Also no weird abortion soapboxing kthnx. 

I would have continued the plotline of Dinah mentoring Steph as well instead of randomly dropping it, to the point where Dinah is as much, if not more, of an influence and source of skill as Bruce. I think this would have been a great way to sort of counteract the “boys club” mentality of Bruce’s gang back then and compare their methods, and would have put Steph in a really unique position where she balances these two worlds. This would have also led to a relationship between Babs and Steph happening a lot earlier, and maybe she would have even become reserve BOP member.

Similarly, her training with Cass would have never been interrupted and they would have teamed up a lot more, with their relationship growing.

Now we get to Robin. Bruce would not have fired her after three issues in my world. My Robin book would have been split between Steph becoming more acclimated to life as Robin, gong through all the conflicts and growing pains she would, while also focusing on Tim’s struggles getting acclimated to civilian life again in contrast, dealing with his family,  his mixed feelings, maybe even him mentoring Steph in dealing with Bruce, since it’s not fair to drop him completely. Also! She definitely wouldn’t have become Robin because she thought Tim was cheating on her (which was silly and OOC for her at that point) and Bruce wouldn’t have made her Robin to get back at Tim. It would have been a decision made between her and Tim and one they convinced Bruce to agree to. 

The arc would have at least been a couple years long. If Steph left, it would be her decision- a mix of her realizing that maybe her and Bruce’s worldviews clash too much, that she’s more comfortable as her own agent and also that Tim misses being Robin.

Now, Steph becoming Batgirl. If we’re talking my ideal world this wouldn’t need to happen at all (Steph is already part of Babs and Cass’s team and in good standing with the superhero community after a lot of struggles, and Cass has kept being Batgirl uninterrupted).

But disregarding that, if it does happen, it definitely doesn’t involve Cass leaving Gotham and never being mentioned by Steph, or Bruce ordering Cass to do so. It happens because Cass chooses another superhero identity of her own accord and hands the legacy to Steph because she trusts her to continue it. Cass stays in Gotham and they continue being best friends and partners.

Whew! I think that about covers it. 

argostlives  asked:

So, you're feminist and you're happy that Stephanie slapped Batman. Well how would you like if male character would slap Wonder Woman?

hahhahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaa

oh my god

i dunno did Wonder Woman purposefully manipulate a teenage male character endlessly and constantly  put them through weird trials and tests for no fucking reason and was that male character previously abused by a mother figure and WW took advantage of their issues with that? Did she treat him differently from her other charges? Did WW canonically judge that male character for coming from a family with a “criminal background”? Was the male character then subjected to a horrible crossover where they were tortured and treated like shit and WW was automatically absolved of all blame for her role in it by passing the buck to a previously pacifist doctor?

Yeah then, I’d be down for her getting slapped for that.

But guess what. THAT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN. DC would NEVER treat a male character like that (unless he was poc, I suppose, but it would take a different form then) DC would NEVER tear down a male sidekick to build WW up. Fuck, they’ve never given WW a male sidekick in the first place. A dude looking up to a lady and carrying on her legacy is too much for them.

DC COMICS TREATS MALE CHARACTERS DIFFERENTLY FROM FEMALE ONES. GASP.

And most importantly? WW has never been shown to be capable of the kind of treatment Bruce gave Stephanie. I couldn’t ever see her saying a person from a criminal family needs to be watched, or putting children through weirdass psychological manipulation.

nice try.

nineteenninetyonenostalgia  asked:

What do you think of Superman and Lois Lane as individual characters unto themselves? As in do you like/dislike Lois. Do you like/dislike Superman.

I’m surprised anyone could know me and not know how ridiculously in love with Lois Lane I am, but I suppose that comes with not posting about comics a lot anymore.

Lois is the absolute greatest. She’s the incarnation of journalistic integrity and dedication. As someone who has worked in journalism, she’s my idol. Moreover, you gotta recall she originally was a lady working as a journalist in the 1940s, railing against sexism (she hated being relegated to advice columns because of her gender) and taking down goons on her own. She’s every inch the hero Superman is and his living example of the greatness of humanity- she rushes right in there to get her story and help people no matter the danger despite being mortal. And she’s just unabashedly married to her career and ambitious as hell, and it’s (in good stories) played as a great thing about her.

She’s also directly referred to herself as a feminist at least twice in comics (once in a really bad comic, but once during the arc where she got married to Clark and that was a fantastic comic). She’s…actually the only character I’ve seen do that? Like I haven’t even seen Wonder Woman say “I’m a feminist” and I’ve read a lot of Wonder Woman, though I might have missed something. But I only needed to read a handful of Lois comics before I happened on her talking about how she supports feminism.

I also love Clark, a lot, when he’s written right. He’s the kind of man who admires and adores someone like Lois for the exact reasons I’ve stated,which is honestly enough for me to love him? I’ve made it clear dudes who respect and love ladies I love as much as I do get my support as default because WE ARE CLEARLY ON THE SAME PAGE. He’s just so unashamedly good and loves everything so much. He’s the dude who sees that human spirit is so much greater than power. He’s the guy who just loves working for a newspaper and being on the farm when he has the power to bring the entire world to its knees. I love that kind of person and it’s sad that people think that kind of person is automatically boring. 

rachaellikespink  asked:

The magical girl fandom in general.

Ohhhh boy. My number one least favorite discourse in magical girl fandom is the idea we’re not allowed to view the magical girl genre as positive in any way re: girls because one person on tumblr said they didn’t like it as a Japanese feminist and therefore all Japanese feminists hate it because Japanese feminists would clearly all have the exact same view about everything, just like Western feminists do ohwait.

I actually found this discourse so suspect I did some research and surprise! Not every Japanese person agrees on this thing being terrible! And some see many positive aspects re: gender representation in the magical girl genre and even call it feminist. And then there’s the female creators of major magical girl works who expressed that their intent was to empower girls. We should not just decide to trash the work and intent of these women in the name of feminism.

The main academic discussion on magical girls I found by a Japanese feminist (Akiko Sugawa-Shimada) talked about both negative and positive aspects and gave a very nuanced presentation, rather than just condemning everything.

I do think it’s important to keep cultural context in mind and keep in mind we’re coming for a different context than the cultural origin and it is obviously reductive to declare the magical girl genre uniformly positive re: gender. .But the idea we can’t talk about the positive things and positive impact the genre has on us as women is ridiculous. 

I kind of take this stance regarding anime in general. It’s definitely important to keep in mind we don’t fully grasp the original cultural context and we shouldn’t be simplistic and reductive in our analysis (i have been guilty of this in the past) but if you’re a fan of something, you should be allowed to discuss the things that bother you about it or make you happy re: treatment of female characters or other issues. And if something in the original cultural context makes your perception of this distorted through the lens of your culture, we can then take the opportunity to learn about that and take it into account.  And obviously we should listen to Japanese women and give their voices priority

 But completely silencing dialogue about anime among Western people interested in the social impact of media just allows the people in OUR culture having harmful reactions to this work (bashing female characters, excusing a character’s act of sexual assault, etc) to go unchallenged and continue to spread their harmful rhetoric among Western fandom and communities.

This media impacts us and influences when we watch it, and we should discuss that.

my-life-is-a-bad-romcom  asked:

Why would you have a problem with guys watching Sailor Moon? As long as they aren't assholes about it like they are with MLP then I see no problem with it.

I don’t have a problem with guys watching Sailor Moon. I never said that or anything like that. I responded to the brony questions, which means “if they’re assholes like with MLP” implicitly. Please read more carefully.

Guys can watch Sailor Moon all they want and participate in the fandom all they want. I have no problem with that if they’re not gross or entitled about it and they don’t feel the need to take over and demand the show pander to them. Because it’s not a show that’s supposed to be aimed for them, it’s been Takeuchi’s goal to make this a franchise to empower girls from the beginning, and that needs to be respected.

chirabella  asked:

I will say this for the most recent Ace Attorney episode: It showed us Nick's pink scrapbook of Edgeworth-related press clippings, which he apparently keeps with him at all times.

There definitely were a couple highlights of this episode and that was definitely one of them.

“OKAY MAYA TO ACCENTUATE THIS STORY I’M GOING TO SHOW YOU MY SPECIAL EDGEWORTH SCRAPBOOK”

“Nick.This is getting ridiculous.”

“I JUST LIKE TO KEEP SCRAPBOOKS ABOUT MY SPECIAL CHILDHOOD FRIEND AND CARRY THEM WITH ME AT ALL TIMES. IT’S NORMAL FRIEND BEHAVIOR”.

“You’re not fooling anyone here, bud.”

counterwiddershins  asked:

Do you have any thoughts on the recent Steven Universe episode? I was a little apprehensive about the ending, in that I didn't quite understand why Bismuth had to be bubbled at the end. Couldn't the gems have talked to Bismuth and tried to bring her around like they did with Peridot? (though I guess Peridot WOULD have stayed bubbled w/o Steven's intervention) Just seems weird that the gems wouldn't want to talk this stuff over with her.

Yeah, it really doesn’t make sense at all, as I noted in my previous answer, and is my big beef with the ep. I would have been fine with everything else if it hadn’t ended that way. I hope they have a good followup to this, Bismuth deserves better. As noted in previous posts as well, the only real explanation for the ending seems to be “well she’s a guest voice gotta put her on a metaphorical bus”. 

I suppose the only explanation I would buy was Steven’s confrontation with Bismuth was a lot more emotionally taxing that his confrontations with Peridot and Lapis ever were. I mean, they were both crying, this is the first time Steven’s been forced to poof a non-corrupted gem and it could easily be most traumatizing fight Steven’s been involved in. If he was freaked and needed some time to process it before facing her again (and untangling a bunch of truly massive amount of issues involving his mom and her and all sorts of things), and felt she did too, that would be understandable. 

regallibellbright  asked:

I really think the Killing Joke/Death in the Family combo just broke the Joker (and by extension, Batman as a whole.) By that point the Joker demonstrably has a body count, he won't stop so long as he's alive, and so he no longer works as a villain because both killing him and leaving him alive wreck Batman's morality. And thus we get Murderclown, God of Death, and all that crap in Injustice's backstory.

Yeah, it really did fuck things up irreparably for the mythos, as did the Killing Joke- there’s literally no justification for why the Joker hasn’t gotten executed. Even outside whether Batman would have done it, he would have been put of death row for this shit, some cop would have “accidentally” shot him, I mean. And it took away the Joker’s ability to be enjoyable as a villian in a lot of ways- everything with him was so weighed down from that point on.

But mostly, it started the trend of killing off Batman’s sidekicks for shock effect

It marked a new era for DC- they’d do anything to their characters for publicity, even brutally murdering their child characters. Storytelling didn’t matter.

AND it started the constant ping-pong between LonerBatman and Batman with Robin. Bruce really made his descent from a troubled but stable individual to the manipulative and often monstrous guy he’s often portrayed as now. He was starting to show SIGNS of that before Jason died, but yeah, the writers felt free to go full asshole after that, especially since there was this constant tug of war whether Bruce should have kids or not, so Bruce was constantly pushing them away and then changing his mind.

It just..really shouldn’t have happened. They shouldn’t have had their readers vote whether to kill of a fifteen-year-old character. It’s ghoulish, it’s callous, it’s being edgy for the sake of it. And comics continued following that trend.

lunavenger  asked:

What do you think about people drawing connections between the Bismuth episode and shaming victims who fight against their oppressors? I'm not sure about it really, it's not like Steven is saying not to fight back, but saying not to literally murder the other side. IDK but I would like a different perspective on it, if you have the time. Thanks!

Well, I do think there are situations where it can be necessary to resist with lethal force- I think if the other side is literally trying to kill every last one of you to conquer the nation for themselves, it’s okay to fight back lethally.

But that’s also in the real world, where you can’t REALLY fight people with machine guns by knocking them out and dragging them to prison- they will shoot you before you get close. Or reliably incapacitate people by targeting non-lethal areas. The gems actually have an effective way of subduing folks non-lethally, that Homeworld doesn’t appear to be able to counteract. They can just poof and bubble and no more trouble. It might be slightly harder, but I’m not sure it’s nigh impossible. I’m actually not sure Bismuth’s way would have been infinitely more effective than just poofing- it actually probably would have caused the Diamonds to use the nuclear option sooner. I think Bismuth was wrong in saying killing soldiers would have prevented that.  (There’s also the fact that shattering a gem seems to be even WORSE than killing in some elements, with them living on as tortured disembodied parts).

Buuuut on the other hand, the argument of the episode wasn’t about practicality and was likely meant to resonate with the real world in some way. I do think Steven saying “you’re just as bad as them if you kill’ basically is iffy. No, you aren’t as bad as them unless you’re crafting a totalitarian regime and trying to colonize planets, exploit people and being aggressors

.But I don’t think a method of non-lethal resistance is a bad thing- it is absolutely in character for Steven to not want to kill anyone from we know of him, and generally kids shows try to encourage not killing people so it was expected. I think it’s fine to have the debate and even favor the non-lethal side- but the fact Bismuth was bubbled away and treated like one of the corrupted gems is what leaves a bad taste. 

Bismuth has a legitimate point of view that came from a place of wanting to protect people she cared about. It is a problem that she tried to kill Steven obviously, but so did Lapis and Peridot and they’re not in bubbles right now. Bismuth also primarily got violent with Steven bc of her anger at Rose and she seems to realize Steven’s not Rose now. Also Garnet and Pearl might be able to help in talking her down. So having her treated like a villain is just wrong I think. But I guess I’m willing to see if the show goes anywhere with her. Right now, though, it’s really bothersome. 

As far as larger message and any parallels it might have, it’s not really my lane either. Bismuth is coded black, Homeworld is coded as a conquering nation, giving an opinion on whether the show is doing badly with these elements isn’t really my place. I do think it’s obvious the show isn’t sending a message VIOLENT resistance is bad, since the gems do fight, but other than that that’s all I can speak on. 

aiojvjkj----moisjfiosjfosj-deac  asked:

Ladyloveandjustice, I don't follow your blog and am sorry to pester you but would you let people know about this change org petition that's going around tumblr to stop Vic Mignogna from voicing Rin in the Free! anime? He's homophobic and has a reputation for hitting on/engaging in sexual intercourse with under-age girls. People in the Free! fandom want him to be fired because we feel he poses a danger to young fans who he'll have access to at conventions.

I’m not sure how you knew about me if you don’t follow my blog, but sure, guys there’s a change.org petition to get Vic McEggnog fired from this position, and considering his reputation that would be in the best interests of the young female fanbase of Free!

tedbelmont  asked:

Hey, Wonder Woman is going to be in a movie! Sure, she'll be a supporting character behind two male leads in a movie from the guy who made Sucker Punch, but it's the thought that counts, right??? :|

nope

no thoughts are counting

i want her to have her own movie not be second billing to Superman and Batman swinging their dicks at each other

I mean maybe we’ll luck out and the reason she’s in the movie is to scold them both for being fucking machismo driven losers and break up their fight like she did in the new frontier special. That’d be a pretty fittting debut

haha as if can you imagine the current set of DC movies doing something like this especially Zack Snyder and David Goyer.

i don’t have high hopes.

fireyfobbitmedicine  asked:

What's an example of a,female character being used to develop a male character?

I mean…almost every single love interest or little sister or mom in fiction ever? You can just google “women in refrigerators” and most of those examples are a female character dying to develop a male character.

I should note that this is not always a bad trope (wir is, but I meant the broader “female character develops a male character”). Characters help each other develop all the time, regardless of gender. That’s how fiction works. That’s how LIFE works. It’s when her ONLY purpose is to develop the male character it gets facepalmy. 

Characters I adore, like Winry Rockbell, are undeniably part of  a male character-Ed’s- development- he learns to be more respectful and honest through his relationship with Winry and also values his humanity more with her example. But she also has her own arc going (which Ed occasionally acts to help develop her during) and any problems anyone has with that aside, that makes her character more than just Ed.  Other examples people love, like Mako Mori, aid in male character’s development while having their own arcs too.

But if you want an example that isn’t women in fridges, look at Sharon Carter in the Captain America movies. Particularly in Civil War. As my friend pointed out, her function in that movie is entirely to kickstart his decision to stand firm about his side in  the debate with Tony, give him stuff he needs and be the Essential Het Romance TM. Even her connection to Peggy is entirely framed as about Steve.

We know nothing about her aside from that, she gets barely any screentime, what she can do for Steve is her only purpose in the movie. What a cipher she is not only damages her, but Steve. We know so little about her other than “Peggy’s niece” and “gives Steve stuff” that this seems to be Steve’s only reason for macking on her, which, ew. The romance is not at all believable.

And to be clear, I’m not like, really into MCU shipping at all. But can Marvel really be surprised fans prefer Steve with dudes who are actually fully developed characters with defined personalities and complex relationships with him than a woman they didn’t even bother to give a personality and function beyond “whoops Steve needs a girlfriend or he isn’t a Real Man also she can punch stuff see she is a Strong Female Character”? It’s really one of the ultimate examples of how movies believe female characters don’t need to have a presence if they’re “just love interests” and how any romance, no matter how poorly developed, is expected to be believed just cuz it’s a guy and a girl in the same room.

themetaisawesome  asked:

I'm not sure if someone else already asked for this one, but sorting hat with Steven Universe?

Steven- THE MOST HUFFLEPUFF TO EVER HUFFLEPUFF. A sweetie who just wants everyone to get along.

Rose- same 

Greg- this is a family of hufflepuffs?

Connie- Gryffindor yo. CHALLENGE AUTHORITY.

Garnet- also Gryffindor, though I have a feeling Sapphire might be Ravenclaw. Ruby is Gryff though.

Pearl- Ravenclaw. intellectual, methodical, fights thoughtfully…maybe some traces of hufflepuff since she’s such a worrywart. She really values her brains though, so she’d definitely have the hat sort her in Ravenclaw.

Amethyst- Reckless Gryffindor.

Peridot- Either a Ravenclaw who is very detached from the subject of her studies or a Slytherin

Jasper- the eagerness to fight says Gryffindor really

Lapis- WHEN HUFFLEPUFFS ARE PUSHED TOO FAR…

Sadie- Gryffindor

Lars- Slytherin tbh. Also Mayor Dewey. 

lobobathory  asked:

Any thoughts about yuri? I just came back to reading yuri recently after few years outside manga fandom and I am sincerely surprise by the lack of magic girls yuri. I mean magic girls has such a potential with homosexual romance (vide: Utena) but all I can find in Internet is high school yuri. Could you give me some tip what I should read? Because I feel a little bit too old to read high school nsfw manga. Mature yuri maybe? Yuri about 20-30 something?

I love yuri when it’s not just fap material for dudes! I reccomend this ginormous yuri rec list, which includes some yuri about older ladies. Here’s some yuri with trans characters that are solid. A lot of those are about older ladies.

Have fun!

nineteenninetyonenostalgia  asked:

Do you have any thoughts on the relatively recent relationship in the DC New 52 between Superman and Wonder Woman? Personally I don't care for it.

Yeah, it’s a notp. I’ve gone into it before but the reasons I’ve seen people ship it are usually misogynistic and misunderstand both characters. Lois is an essential part of Clark’s character because falling in love with someone from earth shows his essential connection to humanity- and the fact that Clark admires someone like Lois- who is vulnerable and mortal and often underestimated, but will put her life on the line for her principles and has integrity and dedication- as HIS hero and love shows what kind of man he is. Taking that away takes away an important part of his character that HAS BEEN THERE SINCE THE INCEPTION AND STUCK AROUND FOR MOST OF HIS HISTORY BECAUSE IT WORKED! Lois is essential to give Clark humanity. His parents are another human connection, and of course DC took them away too. DC comics does not currently get Superman. At all.

I’ve seen a lot of SM/WW shippers be really gross about Lois too, so yeah, that definitely sours me on it. Especially the “man of steel woman of kleenex” shit, which is supremely disrespectful to the woman involved and ignores the fact Clark has PRETTY GOOD CONTROL OF HIMSELF considering he doesn’t crush everything. 

The reasoning for Clark and Diana seems to be they’re both the strongest so they should be together. Which is bad reasoning and honestly the idea you shouldn’t be with someone who’s less physically strong because that’s the most important form of strength? That only superheroes can understand each other? That WW and Supes are gods that shouldn;t be with humans? Fuck off with that.

And my other hugest sticking point besides Lois is Diana is just going to be overshadowed by Superman in DC and everyone else’s eyes if she’s connected to him in that way. I’ve seen people refer to her as just “Superman’s girlfriend” and when she’s connected to him like that, that’s how people will see her. DC has never given her the spotlight he gets. They will always put him first. She needs her own space and her own love interest. I don’t at all trust DC not to define her by him. Ever.

paxesoterica  asked:

I know you're an expert on queer lady race car drivers, so how'd you reckon a match between Haruka/Anthy/Asami would go? What role would their GFs play, if any?

I was not aware that “queer lady racecar driver expert” was a title I had, but sure.  I think judging from their respective canons, Utena would be Anthy’s car and Michiru and Korra would be in the passenger’s seats. Probably Korra would yell a lot of trash talk and barely restrain herself from bending. Michiru meanwhile just gets a quiet, icy intensity that motivates Haruka (while Korra mostly distracts Asami with her antics lol Korra).

As to who would win? Anthy broke out of Ohtori and bought revolution to the world last time she drove Utena, so my odds are on her. But really, aren’t we ALL winners if this race happens?