ANNOUNCEMENT - please check out the trailer for my new 8 part LGBTQ+ Pride Month series, “Chosen Family: Stories of Queer Resilience” - my hope is to amplify the disenfranchised voices within our community, honor our history, & fight for our future. creating this series enriched my little gay soul, so any reblogs would mean the world to me. thanks for the love & support!!
Shoutout to my disenfranchised black girls. My black girls who don’t fit in. My weirdo black girls,my alternative black girls,my goth black girls, my nerdy black girls, my socially awkward black girls. Love your weirdness, love your originality
I find it horrid that we (POCs) are devalued in this country to the point even our food in this country is seen as suppose to be cheap. The fact our cuisine and something like Tacos are so delicate, are full of flavor, time consuming in prep of the pieces that they should not be devalued. The fact food created by indigenous/immigrant and other disenfranchised groups are targeted with having cheap food when the value of these dishes should be the same of any five star restaurant. Even in my household we hold a saying of certain dishes being “Poor People’s food” when dishes of that title could rival any other. When dishes like a steak and potato with some mixed vegetables are what we can accept for a higher price when something like Mole which is from more if not as much care and prep. is what we accept to be cheaper than the steak. I know this perspective is rarely spoken on but it is important that a gourmet restaurant of these disenfranchised groups that is actually owned by them should be payed a right price for the food that is from a line of history and made with care and love from our ancestor’s efforts.
I recently came across a discussion on Tony Stark as a queer-coded character in the comics (which I’m not going to link to because many of the threads were already deleted, ergo I’m assuming that the participants didn’t want the conversation to be spread), and I found it very interesting. For years I have read Tony Stark as subtextually bisexual in the comics, which hasn’t really translated to the films – at least not to the extent that the character of Captain America has been coded as bisexual in them. There has always been a borderline homoerotic relationship between Tony and his armor especially. But adjacent to this conversation, there was also an interesting thread in which Tony Stark asthe most female-coded superhero was discussed that I found fascinating.
Someone commented on the concept stating that while it may be true for the comics, movie-verse Tony Stark is certainly not female-coded.
But isn’t he, though?
We’ve discussed before how hypermasculinity sometimes seems to go so over-the-top that it does a full 360, coming out the other side seeming rather feminized, the hypermasculine male presented as a sexual object with assets on display (slim waist, thick thighs, full chest) for the consumption of the male gaze. But that’s not the case with Tony Stark; it isn’t his hypermasculinity that makes him seem female-coded, it’s the question of agency.
Tony does seem to possess many traits that we consider culturally feminine, female cliches, such as talking a lot and talking fast, using a rich vocabulary, a short and petite stature as compared to other superheroes, the narrative passing jugement on his promiscuity, the narrative passing judgement on his desire for junk-food, his passive demeanor, his self-consciousness about his body and having to wear underarmor in public to manage his chest, his avoidance of interpersonal conflict, looking for daddy’s love and approval, the way in which he conceals much of his intelligence because he knows that if people saw him for how he really is, they would be off-put by it ie. giving the appearance of being smart-but-not-too-smart, the eroticizing of his appearance in the narrative, the focus on what he’s wearing, his obsessive-compulsive behavior, meticulous grooming habits, delicate features, dressing to impress professionally, carrying conversations, his weakness being his heart, the fact that he has to dress into a suit that conceals his identity, his true self, to interact with the world, a hard outer shell that conceals his soft inside. There are aspects to Tony Stark in the films that are female-coded.
I think that some people might find these aspects difficult to see because there are three distinct personas to the character: there’s the Tony Stark that he projects to the outside world to hide who he really is that is his true armor, there’s Iron Man that is a prosthetic, an armor that shields him and allows him the protection of being who he really is, and then there’s Tony Stark, the person he is in his heart of hearts that we see only when’s alone with the artificial intelligences he created for himself, as his friends, the only friends that really, truly get to see him, because he knows that they won’t judge him (outside of him being alone, we see glimpses of the ‘real’ Tony Stark in Afganistan, in his interactions with Natasha and in two scenes with Steve: while they’re cutting wood and Tony asking Steve whether he knew).
These are the three sides to Tony Stark, and I see a lot of fans confuse his Tony Stark armor, his protective persona, with who he is because that is, by design, the loudest, most visible side to him.
There are many sides to him that are female-coded, but it’s the limited agency that he is given in the narrative that is the most telling. Most of his stories seem to revolve around the stripping of his agency and his struggle to regain it. This character – a genius, billionaire, playboy, philantropist – who ought to be the ultimate male power fantasy has all of his stories constructed around his lack of agency and his need of a prosthetic to claim agency for himself. It’s easy to assume that an able-bodied, rich, good-looking, well-educated, white CEO of the American upper crust has all the power and control in the world, but the narrative begins disabusing the viewer of this notion right off the bat. The narrative deconstructs his agency.
What I appreciated about the Iron Man films was how they subverted the role of the damsel in distress in Pepper Potts. Especially the end of the first film in which Pepper marched through broken glass in her stiletto shoes to save Tony Stark was something that made me stop and think for days afterwards. The third film basically recreated this subversion of the trope louder for those in the back that hadn’t caught it the first time. It was Pepper Potts that was the knight in shining armor, not the title character.
And it is Tony that we see as the damsel in distress, particularly again in the first and the third films. The first film contains the iconic scene of Obadiah Stane literally removing Tony’s agency in a scene that is filmed like a sexual violation, a none-too-subtle air of erotic violence in the air as he uses his date rape technology to incapacitate Tony. This is a turning point in the film. The third film contains a scene in which Tony Stark is zip-tied to a bed frame with the villain taunting him. It is implied that Tony is similarly submissive in bed. The main villain in the scene acts like a spurned lover, a definite air of seduction to his conduct toward the tied-up hero.
That is two cases of villains making eroticized advances toward a physically incapacitated Tony Stark. And it isn’t the violence or the incapacitation that makes the scenes female-coded, it is the eroticization of it. It is female characters that are subject to eroticized violence, generally speaking. The second film does not follow the pattern, but it could be interepreted as an obsessive, spurned man making unwanted advances toward our hero.
I wrote about the interaction between Natasha and Tony previously, on how she allows us to see a side of him that we usually don’t get to see. Some people have described Tony’s hiring of her as sexist, undoubtedly influenced by Pepper’s interpretation of his behaviour as he tried to figure her out (“And she is potentially a very expensive sexual harassment lawsuit if you keep ogling her like that.”), but his interest in her was never that kind of interest. His eyes don’t track her sexual assets. Tony saw something of himself in her, especially in the way she was playing a role, but even more than that, I think Tony saw in Natasha Romanoff something that he wanted desperately to be. In control.
Natasha Romanoff gives the air of being in control even when she gives up control, and in this she is the opposite of Tony Stark.
With this in mind, and I don’t remember whether I wrote about this before, I was quite disturbed by the way the climax of Civil War was shot not unlike a pornographic sex scene, Tony Stark being double-teamed by the super soldiers. The ending of the scene especially, with Steve straddling Tony, pounding on him, grunting, finishing it off with breathing heavily as he falls off Tony having penetrated his arc reactor with his shield, having incapacitated Tony’s prosthetic. Tony spits out blood as the super soldiers walk away from him. It’s rather symbolic, the implications of the scene very uncomfortable.
While Bucky Barnes is another character whose storyline heavily features the stripping down of agency, the female-coding of the strong, stoic silent-type is largely absent. Bucky Barnes and Tony Stark share similarities, and in this he offers a contrast to Tony.
So, yes. I do see Tony Stark of the movie-verse as a female-coded superhero because his story revolves around desperately grasping for agency. Among these hypermasculine heroes, the genius-billionaire-playboy-philantropist is at a disadvantage, so Tony Stark invented, constructed, and put on a suit that hides his true identity in order to have a measure of agency in a hypermasculine world, that allows him to assert himself. And in Civil War he was willing to sign off on his self-created agency because the establishment had managed to convince him that as a person with near unlimited resources, he was a danger to the world that he had risked his life and the lives of his loved ones to protect.
I think one of the most telling aspects of his character vis-à-vis Civil War is that, convinced that it is too dangerous for him to attempt to influence the outside world and other people in it, Tony Stark instead turned within and attempted to modify his own internal world, to (literally) influence his own internal state instead – to accept what he can’t change. This is a classic strategy of the disenfranchised.
Tony Stark is the most female-coded of the male superheroes.
hi everyone!! my name is Tyler Oakley, & i make stuff on youtube. this month, i’m launching “Chosen Family: Stories of Queer Resilience” - an eight part series on youtube.com/tyleroakley to celebrate LGBTQ+ Pride Month, where i hope to amplify disenfranchised voices/stories within the community, honor our history, & have open and honest discussions. (watch the trailer here)
to celebrate the launch, i’m doing an Answer Time here on tumblr, on Tuesday, June 6th at 3:30pm PT / 6:30pm ET!! so ask me anything here & i might answer your question!!
Why are so many women now speaking out about the sexual abuses they’ve experienced for years? Is there anything unique about the time we’re now living through that has encouraged them to end their silence?
I can’t help think their decisions are part of something that’s happening throughout much of American society right now – a backlash against what has been the growing domination of America by powerful and wealthy men (and a few women) who came to believe they can do whatever they want to do, to whomever they choose.
“When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab ‘em by the pussy,” said Donald Trump in the infamous 2005 Access Hollywood tape.
Sexual assault is one obvious assertion of dominance. Other forms include economic bullying and the stoking of bigotry to gain political power.
Trump epitomizes it all. As a businessman he stiffed contractors, used bankruptcy to avoid paying creditors, and wielded lawsuits to threaten critics.
As a politician he gained traction by alleging Obama was born in Africa, Mexicans are rapists and murders, and Muslims must be kept out of America.
As president, he has bullied everyone who disagrees with him – journalists, judges, members of congress, his own staff and cabinet.
And he’s bullied the vulnerable and innocent – “dreamers” who came to the U.S. as small children but could be deported because of him; the elderly and sick who may lose their health coverage because of him; the needy families who will no longer receive assistance because the the massive corporate tax cuts he’s pushing will require cuts in programs they depend on.
But the days of Trump and the bullying he represents are numbered.
Soon after the 2016 election, millions of women marched against Trump, and the Resistance was born.
Americans are rising up against bullying.
On November 7, Virginia Republican candidate Ed Gillespie’s hate-filled Trump-style campaign for governor of Virginia collapsed in a nearly nine-point defeat to Ralph Northam. Democrats swept statewide elections in Virginia, won the New Jersey governor’s race, and achieved other victories across the nation.
One consequence of Trump’s presidency has been a sharp increase in the number of female candidates and winners. More than 20,000 women have declared themselves candidates for public office so far, according to Stephanie Schriock, the president of Emily’s List – an unprecedented number.
This should be the Democrat’s hour – especially if they stand up against the bullies of America, and stand for the millions who have been humiliated, intimidated, disenfranchised, and disempowered.
Democrats will need to gain 24 seats to take control of the House in 2018. It will be difficult, given the amount of gerrymandering and other forms of voter suppression imposed by Republican legislatures.
Nevertheless, last month Cook Political Report shifted 12 House districts in favor of Democrats, a full year ahead of the 2018 midterms.
A poll released at the beginning of November showed Democrats with an 11-point lead over Republicans on a generic House ballot.
The Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 51 percent of registered voters said they would vote for the Democrat in their district, while 40 percent said they would vote for the Republican.
The revolt against Trump is a backlash against bullying in all its forms. Powerful and wealthy men who have felt free to impose their will on others, regardless of the pain they cause, are in for a rude awakening.
1. Molasses to Rum from 1776: explains the triangle trade as well as the hypocrisy of the revolutionary era on the topic of slavery
2. Sit Down John from 1776: the apprehension of moderates to declare independence during the continental congress
3. But Mr. Adams from 1776: the declaration of independence (this is partly on here bc it’s about jefferson wanting to bust his nut)
4. Non-Stop from Hamilton: the formation of the federal government, the constitutional convention, and the federalist papers
5. Cabinet Battle #1 from Hamilton: arguments between federalists and democratic republicans over assumption, excise taxes on whiskey, and slavery
6. The Room Where It Happens from Hamilton: the dinner that jefferson hosted which decided assumption as well as where the capital would be located
7. The Election of 1800 from Hamilton: the election of 1800 would lead to the creation of political parties
8. Alll American Prophet from Book of Mormon: the formation of mormonism and its westward expansion
9. Rock Star from Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson: the anti-elitist sentiments that would lead to an increase in populism as well as how jackson’s anti-elitist populism contradicted with his own superiority complex
10. Corrupt Bargain from Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson: the bargain which got JQA elected during the tie breaker for the election of 1824
11. Populism Yea Yea from Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson: the rise of populism and jacksonian democracy
12. Ten Little Indians from Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson: the awful awful treatment of native americans (especially during jackson’s administration)
13. Someone In a Tree from Pacific Overtures: the treaty of kanagawa and the “opening” of japan
14. The Wild Wild West from Harvey Girls: westward expansion and the wild west
15. Paint Your Wagon from Paint Your Wagon: the california gold rush and westward expansion
16. A Peculiar Institution from Civil War: the awful awful treatment of slaves
17. The Glory from Civil War: the civil war in general
18. The Ballad Of Booth from Assassins: john wilkes booth’s assassination of abraham lincoln
19. The Ballad of Guiteau from Assassins: charles guiteau’s assassination of president garfield because he wanted to place chester a arthur in power so his faction would reap benefits of patronage
20. The Bottom Line from Newsies: business owner’s cost cutting methods which often disenfranchised the workers
21. The World Will Know from Newsies: the organization of labor unions against big business during the gilded age
22. The Ballad of Czolgosz from Assassins: leon czolgosz’s assassination of president william mckinley because he felt the working class was oppressed
Think about the number of times you’ve heard people bring up Hillary not campaigning in Wisconsin versus the number of times you’ve heard people bring up Scott Walker’s voter ID laws disenfranchising 200,000 people (Trump won the state by 20,000.) That’s what’s wrong with political discourse, the focus on performative bullshit like shaking hands in a Milwaukee diner and not deep structural problems.
“The only thing [the clones] all had in common was their appearance—although
they were starting to age differently, she could see that now—and what
the Republic had done to them. Apart from that, they were individuals
with the full range of virtues and habits of random humankind, and she
now felt completely at home with them. If she had a side in this
war, this was the one she chose: the disenfranchised, unreasonably
loyal, heartbreakingly stoic ranks of manufactured men who deserved
Star Wars - Republic Commando: True Colors by Karen Traviss
Philly comic shop awarded $50,000 to open more doors
Comic book stores, like their retail cousins record shops, are often drawn to tight quarters. Even the “Android’s Dungeon,” the comic shop out of The Simpson’s fictional landscape, occupies only a thin slice of imagined real estate, squished between a barbershop and a diner. But Amalgam Comics & Coffeehouse, the brainchild of Philly resident Ariell Johnson, is spread out, light-filled and roomy –– the sprawling comic displays, coffee bar and plush couches are the first visual cues that the Kensington comic emporium is not like its peers.
This week, the Knight Foundation selected Johnson out of more than 4,500 applicants to receive a grant of $50,000. The eighteen-month old comic shop aims to open the world of comics to an “amalgamation” of audiences –– this grant will help the store reach even more.
Johnson’s proposal, “Up, Up and Away: Building a Programming Space at Amalgam Comics & Coffeehouse” will expand the shop into “Amalgam University,” where hopeful writers and illustrators can take classes on drawing, writing, pitching and publishing.
Johnson has already made waves in the comic world. When she opened the store in December of 2015, Johnson became the first African-American woman to own a comic book store on the East Coast. In addition to the largely white-male-authored mainstream staples, Amalgam stocks many works written by people of color, women and members of the LGBT community, as well as those by independent creators.
Because Amalgam sells self-published works, Johnson gets a lot of amateur submissions –– and many of them don’t meet the standards for retail.
“Often, the ideas are there, but they haven’t studied the craft,” Johnson explained. “It’s a comic book, but it’s also literature. Just like there are good writers of literature, there good writers and illustrators of comic books.”
Johnson wanted to find a way to equip aspiring comic creators, particularly those from disenfranchised communities without the means to go to art school, with the tools to compete with mainstream comic books.
Amalgam has already started on this mission –– they run children’s workshops, and partnered with RUSH, Danny Simmons’ arts philanthropy foundation –– an effort which Johnson said is made possible by their spacious venue.
“We do a lot of these programs in our space,” Johnson said. “But the building is actually much bigger. There are rooms behind the bathroom, which we haven’t renovated. This grant will allow us to open up those rooms to the public and create a permanent programming space. We’ll use it to its full potential.”
When the construction is finished sometime next year, Amalgam will be almost twice its present size, and Johnson hopes its impact on the Kensington and comic communities will follow suit. But the store has already influenced the area.
“I actually found out about the grant from a customer named Annie,” Johnson said. “She and her husband had recently moved here. They came in, introduced themselves and encouraged me to apply. Apparently, Amalgam was one of the reasons they moved to the neighborhood.”
Some of Amalgam’s patrons are like Annie –– devoted fans who factor comics into major life decisions –– but others have never read a comic before in their lives.
“We get a lot of newcomers asking for advice.” Johnson explained. “We listen to what people like, and we direct them into their lane. But once they get comfortable, they usually branch out.”
How can I, as a straight white female, support my friends and others on the LGBTQ+ spectrum?
Such a great question!! Listen to their experiences. Amplify their perspectives. Use your place of privilege to fight for their equality. Spread messages of inclusion & love, and don’t ever assume people *know* you’re an ally. Closeted LGBTQ+ people are watching & observing - and everything you do, big or small, signals whether or not you’re someone they can confide in or feel accepted by.
As a gay white cisgender male, so much of my experience making “Chosen Family: Stories of Queer Resilience” was about listening to people who belong to disenfranchised communities within the LGBTQ+ community, and using my platform to amplify their stories. Whether that’s people of color, trans youth, or queer refugees, it’s recognizing that I have certain privileges, and I have an opportunity to use my place of privilege to give them my microphone.
On today’s episode of: Jeff Sessions wants to bring back Jim Crow.
Click the source link for the rest of the article, but as you can see Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III is wasting no time to roll back civil rights protections and make sure discriminatory policies are etched in stone.
Which is exactly wtf everyone - including Coretta Scott King - warned us he would do considering his history of doing JUST THAT - using his political power for racist ends.
Another reason to be worried, these voter ID laws are used to not only disenfranchise poor voters and minorities, but these populations have been specifically targeted since Obama’s win in an effort to regain republican control over districts around the country.
Why the “GA” or “Surface” Interpretation Totally Gives you the Red-Herrings
For two days now I’ve been seeing way too many people crying “misdirect” at, well, the entire trailer. Which is frankly silly because I’ve no doubt that he THEATRICAL TRAILER = exactly what the movie is going to be about. That doesn’t mean there aren’t red-herrings ala Jedi Finn from the TFA trailer, the only red-herring I remember. The TFA trailer was pretty straight-forward in introducing the main players (”I’m no one” Rey, “I was raised to do one thing” Finn and “I’ll finish what you started” Kylo) and giving you a feeling of what the movie was going to be, but I digress…
There are a few red-herrings in the trailer for TLJ, they just aren’t what everybody’s up-in-arms about all over the internet. The GA got two big things from the trailer: Kylo is going to kill Leia and Rey is going to join or at the very least be tempted by the dark side. That’s the surface interpretation and it’s absolutely what Lucasfilm intended people who were only going to watch the trailer once and haven’t been obsessing over this shit for two years to take from it, amirite?
Red-Herring # 1: Kylo Is Going to Kill Mommy
They used a combination of Han’s murder in TFA and Carrie’s tragic and untimely passing as a means of suggesting that Kylo kills Leia because we all know Kylo already did it once and Carrie/Leia won’t be in IX. That said, for us spoiler-fiends there are a whole slew of reasons why we already know that he totally isn’t going to kill his mom, most notably the fact that he has his Act I stitches and Leia survives into Act III on Craft. But, that said, on a one-time viewing the trailer totally gives the surface impression that Kylo’s going to pull that trigger (he did kill daddy, right)? That’s the red-herring, the surface interpretation is that Kylo is going to shoot her while the clip is actually about outlining his internal struggle and really ins’t about Leia dying at all. It’s introducing what is going to be one of Kylo’s major plot-points in TLJ: the struggle, once again, to jump of the self-destructive “kill the past” path and take on a new goal.
Red-Herring # 2: The Infamous Hand
This is the big one, no doubt. Why people are so fixated on discounting it is a totally different story, but either way the surface-read is that Rey is going to go off with Kylo and join the dark side. This time around they’re playing with Empire expectations like Vader’s request that he and Luke overthrow the Emperor together, but a second watch of the trailer quickly reveals that’s not what’s happening at all. In TFA Kylo told Rey “You need a teacher, I can show you the ways of the Force”, so this bit of the trailer is not only an extension of that, it’s also a response to Rey’s line of FORESHADOWING (not misdirection) that will be heard earlier in the film, possibly around a campfire to either Luke or Chewie. Twice in this trailer she says she needs help controlling her powers and finding her way. The trailer answers at the end not with Luke’s hand, but with Kylo’s. The red-herring is that Rey is going dark, the truth is either that Kylo is reaching for the Light or the two of them, disenfranchised by their individual mentor’s inability to guide them, are trusting in each other to find a new way together.
Why TF Aren’t People Talking About This?
The biggest thing about this trailer that people really aren’t talking about enough is Luke and Snoke’s big reveal about the core of Rey and Kylo’s relationship: they share something, something ancient and potentially very dangerous that was destined to bring them together in some manner from the get-go. The “raw power” their mentors make reference to is what fascinated Kylo about Rey in TFA and probably what encouraged his offer to help her. This reveal is without a doubt the biggest spoiler in the trailer because it outlines a dynamic that has been debated with tooth and claw for two years. The truth? They’re equals that are both harborers of “raw power” and “strength” that Kylo was either unable to control or embraced in the past, while it just awoke in Rey, and like Kylo said, “you need a teacher”.
So at the end of the day ya’ll who are focusing on the edits and calling misdirect at everything are missing the point: the surface-read of the trailer is just that, a surface-read, the same surface-read that led people to cry “Jedi Finn” just because Finn used a lightsaber. The trailer absolutely establishes the feeling of what the movie is going to be (and what the major character struggles will be), so don’t get caught up in the irrelevant details. Yes, Kylo is going to struggle and continue to be torn apart. Yes, Luke is going to be scared of Rey. Yes, Rey is going to beg the heavens for help because she won’t be able to control that shit. Yes, Finn is going to infiltrate the FO and fight Phasma. YES, Kylo is going to offer his hand to Rey a second time. We just haven’t seen the results of these character struggles yet.
I woke up [the day after the presidential election] with a very pronounced case of moral clarity. In addition to the disappointment, it was like, oh, this does not change the things that I believe in. The things that I believe in that this candidate doesn’t means we’re going to have to fight for them. You don’t want to go backwards when it comes to our LGBT brothers and sisters; you don’t want to go backwards when it comes to the disenfranchisement of voters of color. We have to keep fighting for the things we believe in, and it just made that very clear: I know who I am, and I know what I’m going to fight for in the years to come.
I am seeing a lot of posts saying how calling out what happened at SDCC as homophobic is ‘ridiculous’. I’d like to address first the scope of what homophobia is, then move onto how the incident was driven by homophobia.
When you hear the term homophobia, it conjures up images of assault or of slurs being thrown out in the open. This is often not the case. Incidences of homophobia can range from the above to smaller instances that make you question whether of not you’re being ‘hysterical’ or ‘dramatic’ for thinking you’re being discriminated against or not. Merriam-Webster defines homophobia as: irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals.