can these narratives please stop now

can we please stop making the only LGBT+ narrative we see “i always knew?”

like, i didn’t always know i liked girls too. i wasn’t having crushes on them or kissing them on the playground when i was five years old like you see on tv or read in books. i didn’t know for sure that i’m bi until literally this year (i’m 17 as of writing this). a former friend of mine is a trans girl. she didn’t always know. she didn’t realize she was trans until she was nearly eighteen years old. some people don’t realize it until they’re twenty, or forty, or sixty.

some people do always know. good for them! but can we please please please make it known that you don’t have to have always known for your identity to be valid? it makes it so difficult for people who are figuring themselves out later in life, because it feeds into this idea of “why didn’t i know it before? is this even real? if i haven’t known i’ve felt this way all along, how do i know i feel it now?” and that’s only making worse what’s already such a difficult time in life

give me eighty year old women who are just figuring out they’re lesbians. give me middle aged accountants who realize they’re actually trans. give me a guy who doesn’t know until he’s twenty-eight that he’s actually into dudes. god just please give us some other narrative, so we can be reassured that even if it took us a while to get there, our identity is no less valid than that of a person who’s known they’re LGBT+ since elementary school. stop telling LGBT+ people that that’s the only way they’re really LGBT+

child-of-night  asked:

For Ugin's sake, can you please stop toying with us and kill Gideon? It feels like his death has been teased too much. You know, between Ob Nixilis trying to drown him on Zendikar, Hazoret's ominous statement at the end of the Amonkhet story and now Bolas burning a giant gaping hole into his shoulder in Hour of Devestation. Please, can you just end the meatslab's pitiful existence?!

Putting one of your main characters in constant jeopardy yet not killing them, what ongoing pop culture narrative does that? Oh, right, almost all of them! : )


[cassette recorder turns on]

Jeffrey Cranor: Hi. Hello. Jeffrey Cranor here, creator and writer of Within the Wires. It’s been a while. What have you been up to since last we talked?
[long beat]
Really? It’s so great to hear your voice. I’m saying these words into your ear right now because I’m excited to announce - season 2 of Within the Wires, a fresh 10-episode season starting September 5, with new episodes every two weeks. There’s also a bonus episode, episode number 0 if you like counting things, being released August 22 only to donors of 50 dollars or more. If you want to be one of these one-time donors and get the early episode exclusive only to this self-selected group, go to

So listen. This new season will be another series of cassettes, but not relaxation cassettes. No no, we are more cultural than that now. We’ll be taking you on audio guide tours of museums, and we’re welcoming a really amazing actor to our Wires family, I cannot wait to tell you more about that person soon.

Finally, please rate and review Within the Wires on Apple podcasts if you haven’t already, or wherever it is you get your digital audio narrative content. That helps us out tremendously. And also hey, tell your friends, there’s a whole season 1 they can binge for free right now, free entertainment y’all.

OK, our time is done. It’s you time now. Time to stop by the museum gift shop, grab yourself a souvenir book of paintings about [distorted] blood loss, pick up a poster featuring [distorted] lions kissing, and buy a commemorative vase made out of [distorted] discarded lettuce.

[cassette recorder stops]

anonymous asked:

please explain to me why there is this suddenly new notion since yesterday that taylor's likes are contradictory and/or meaningless. i see one ask blog have one anon say that and now others are quoting it. i have literally looked at all her likes, like most of us. someone pull a receipt on what is contradictory. Hold please, i'm waiting. oh, there are none? stop with the spreading of false narratives people. we've all looked at her likes.

I’ve seen a bunch of this on my dash, and I’m not sure. I guess people either don’t agree with her interpretations of her own music (which is odd, since she wrote it - you can relate it to whatever you want while acknowledging that that differs from her inspiration), think her team is liking posts for whatever reason, or weren’t here during 1989 and don’t understand how her behavior on Tumblr typically works. Her likes seem pretty cohesive to me, idk.

anonymous asked:

Hey, i was wondering if maybe you could explain why you liked the ending of Gone Girl so much? I mean, not I didn't like it, but i felt it was kind of anticlimactic.

Yes! Of course i can.  For those who want to be unspoiled (for either the book or the movie), please stop reading! Also: I’ll tag this with gone girl spoilers – in case anyone wants to blacklist it. Anon, sorry for taking so long to answer this but I was busy! Thanks for the lovely question!!!!


Getting to the point: Some time ago I read an article discussing how now audiences loved ‘unlikeable’ leads and how it allowed characters (and their overall narrative) to go ‘dark’ and to a complex place. The main examples it gave where Dexter and, most importantly, Walter White.  That much is true! But I wouldn’t say it benefits every character. Male characters are allowed to go “dark and complex” while still being the leads and having an audience that roots for them.

It’s more difficult for women. Women are often criticized for everything. And in media? Their characters are mostly reduced to the same tired stereotypes: the damsel in distress, the  victim, the trophy wife, the evil ‘slut’, the brave rape victim (hotelsongs made this brilliant post about this specific problem, and how Gillian Flynn tackles it) ,etc, etc.

My favorite thing about Gone Girl is that it gives us a female antagonist that isn’t written through male lenses. Amy isn’t carefully written so that men won’t feel threatened by her, so that she won’t emasculate them.   

Still, Amy’s character is defined by her multiple ‘personalities’ all of which she puts to try to –first- please men and then, to dominate them. All those stereotypes male writers tend to turn women characters into? Amy becomes them.  She’s the damsel in distress for Desi, the perfect child for her parents, the “cool girl” and then the “trophy wife” for Nick, the “victim” for the media, and I can go on.  She’s a product of misogyny and the book explores that. This post explains it better than I ever could so I’ll link it too.

There’s a scene in the book, where Amy says she thought Nick knew she was pretending, that she thought they both were.  But Nick wasn’t, because men don’t need to pretend. Remember that part in Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s wonderful speech in which she says that we (society) teach women to “turn pretense into artwork”? Gone Girl works as great commentary for that. That’s Amy. 

So why is the ending important?  The whole book is about Amy turning Nick into not a “perfect husband” but a husband that is perfect for her. As she puts it, he’s finally her match. By the end, she doesn’t have to pretend anymore, not inside of their fucked up marriage. And while she still has to do it for the outside world, now Nick has to do it too. They’re equals (in that sense, as much as she lets him be - she’s still more intelligent,the mastermind, etc). It’s not that she won privileges – it’s that he lost some of his (which where inherently for men). And what is the last ‘stereotype’ she turns herself into? The one that gets her to “win”?  The mother! And I think that’s so great in so many ways, because it’s a spin into the conception that the most important thing that women can achieve is to be a mother. And Amy just uses that to benefit herself!

So, to summarize:  Amy’s “villainous” ways are a product of misogyny - of all the unhealthy expectations men –and society- give to women.  And the thing that is so scary about her (for men, I guess) is that she appropriates it and –kind of- uses it as her strength. She’s literally a “male nightmare”. Like, Nick writes their story from his point of view and she downright erases it.  She’s the one with the last word (as the last line so wonderfully puts it!). And she wins! Female antagonists are always punished by their narratives so this is so refreshing.Lastly, i think any other ending would have felt wrong.  

And If all of this still isn’t enough for you 1) I’m sorry for my dumb explanation 2)just imagine all the buttheart dudebros after watching the (movie) ending (which I really, really hope they keep)!!!! 

Okay but why is internet or electronics or engineering “not Dean’s thing”? It is canon that he made an EMF meter out of a walkman. It is canon that he can hack into security cameras. It is canon that he can make his own sawed off shotguns since he was a teenager. It is canon that he can rebuild cars from the ground up. Dean is capable of a lot of things that people (and the freaking writers) forget just so that they can justify gags in the narrative. I’m sorry, it’s just wrong. You can’t jerk your characters around to fit your plot. “We need a funny and cute broment so let’s make Dean forget all past knowledge about the internet”–like, no, please stop. Dean’s a brilliant dude. Let’s keep him that way.