i don't want to present this as a feminist movie but

stayforthenightifyouwantto  asked:

Hi, I'm v confused about the hunters situation and I'm just trying to understand it more. Because Apollo is obviously against the rule that hunters can't date, is the homophobia coming from Rick? Or is this a literal Artemis thing? I'm not trying to offend or anything honestly, I just don't understand and because I am straight, I'm just trying to figure out where you're coming from because I can't really empathize. I hope I'm not saying anything wrong

this is the most coherent synthesis of my thoughts. as to whether i blame rick or not…i mean it’s a more complicated thing?

like, obviously homophobia is a real actual thing that exists and while i (and many lesbians) might be sick of reading stories about lesbians dealing with trauma and tragedy (because we get that enough in real life & sometimes you just want some lesbian-affirming escapism) emmie and jo have obviously…lived a long and happy life together and are really a beautiful couple, and i am ultimately beside myself with joy that they exist.

and (i would really have to read the book bc i need more context for this) if canon truly does present it like “artemis is pretty much a raging homophobe for doing this but at least they’re happy” then i will be…pacified, i guess.

but i think that canon is vague enough that it doesn’t really comment on whether or not artemis’ rules are terrible either way, even apollo thinking that he disapproves doesn’t do very much because obviously apollo doesn’t approve of swearing off sex or romance and he and artemis have always argued about that. so i think it’s probably less of “my sister’s a homophobe and she sucks” and more of “i’ve always thought these rules were stupid and this is just Extra dumb.” which is just too vague and not satisfactory enough. if you’re going to write homophobic characters and characters dealing with homophobia, then you’ve got to call it what it is. and like, obviously if rick had presented it like “this is homophobic and bad” then there wouldn’t really be any of this discussion in the first place because all the readers would have reached this same conclusion immediately after reading the book, and us lesbians wouldn’t have to tiredly pick through it and be like “actually, guys, this is Not Great”

there’s also the fact that um…he didn’t have to do this. like we could go back and forth for how artemis is presented in the myths, there’s plenty of different opinions on what she actually stood for and interpretations of her character within greek mythology. there’s a couple myths that paint her in an atrocious light, notably the myth where she banished callisto from the hunt because zeus had raped her and gotten her pregnant (there is no way to present this story in a way that doesn’t make artemis look disgusting) and the one where polyphonte ran to artemis for protection from aphrodite, aphrodite got mad and cursed her into falling in love with a bear, and artemis was so disgusted that she kicked her out of the hunt and made all the beasts in her domain hunt her down as punishment.

so anyway, i’m not under the assumption that artemis was a great intersectionalist feminist or anything like that, because she obviously has her messy history, just like the rest of the characters in greek mythology. but that’s where revisionism becomes fun: she is an ancient character with tons of different myths and forms, and considering there’s so many different versions of myths and most of them were created in oral tradition and then finally recorded by numerous men (greek men, who were sexist by default), so it’s really not all that hard to say ‘this didn’t actually happen and artemis would never do that bc, let’s be honest, who wants to read about someone who is this undoubtedly horrific?’

the pjo series is all about that. like, the idea that the greek gods could be children’s characters is practically unthinkable. so much of their personalities and behavior is watered down and reshaped to make it kid friendly. plenty of the myths are scoffed at by the gods themselves within the series, hercules whines about his disney movie being bad, our heroes can mouth off quite a bit without facing half the consequences ancient greeks did. the gods are imperfect in the series because they’re just too much of a moral basket case to totally fix up, and the heroes deal with the ramifications of that (that’s literally…what the series is about), but certain issues need more sensitivity than others and homophobia is definitely one of them. i really liked pjo artemis. i thought she was great. now her whole character is ruined for me. i really don’t see why it was necessary to present her as this badass patron goddess for desperate girls and then turn her into this mess down the road. and that’s all on rick.

which is like, not to even mention that the core of artemis really is protecting women and defending them from men, even if some of her myths are…bad. so i just think it’s a bad interpretation of her to assume she would have any problems with her hunters dating each other, and i don’t actually see what the connection here is to why the hunt exists and why lesbians can’t date and still be part of it. it’s like “artemis, artemis, my dad is trying to sell me to a husband three times my age that i don’t want to marry, can i join your hunt??” “yes, of course, that’s what i’m here for!” “okay cool! i have a crush on this other girl in your hunt, we’re gonna start dating.” “UM NO THAT’S NOT ALLOWED WE DON’T LIKE ROMANCE DIDN’T YOU TAKE THE OATH.”

like, obviously that’s just plain and simple homophobia but what i actually mean is that there’s really no reason that artemis should be homophobic and i can’t think of a good reason for any writer, including rick, to write her that way when it makes a lot less sense for her to be. lots of lesbians identified with artemis.

in short: emmie and jo are great, artemis and the hunt are butchered and there was no good reason to do that other than to make emmie and jo suffer and/or laziness on rick’s part and that sucks, also if THIS is the only lesbian representation we get in all of rick’s books out of all the main characters who could be (and are, whether he knows it or not) lesbians, i will be furious. like yeah it’s great that emmie and jo exist but 1. they’re side characters 2. you don’t have to introduce brand new characters to have more lesbians like hello didn’t you get the memo when all of us lost our minds over nico coming out?? you can do that more than once you know……reyna and rachel are RIGHT THERE,

anonymous asked:

I'm a lesbian and whenever I watch a movie/T.V. show/etc. that has a close friendship between two female characters, my brain always goes "They're lesbians and they're in love". Sometimes jokingly, sometimes not. But then some stupid voice in the back of my head screams "You're sexualizing everything!! You're devaluing platonic female friendships!! That's so gross and un-feminist!!" And while I don't necessarily believe that those things are true, it always makes me feel gross about myself..

I don’t think it’s gross and unfeminist at all. I think we’re conditioned by a lot of internalized homophobia as well as the belief that we are, or can be, predatory like men because we like women and that’s just not true. There’s nothing wrong with wanting lesbian representation, there’s nothing wrong with hoping lesbians are present. ♥

anipendragon  asked:

Now I have to ask, why is Pacific Rim so important to you? I mean, you don't have to share if you don't want to, but I'm sure we'd all love to know.

Oh gosh, let’s see if I can answer this without it turning into a grossly personal essay about life, love, and kaijuu. It’s not perfect by any means, but Pacific Rim stands head and shoulders above its genre peers. Full disclosure: I judge new acquaintances by what they think of Pacific Rim. If they don’t dislike it for the right reasons (e.g., it’s a “silly movie about robots and monsters”), there’s a very high chance that we won’t get along. Pacific Rim breaks the mold in important ways, in a genre that’s KNOWN for sticking to its time-honored tropes. Mako Mori is a non-white, non-Western feminist hero, adopted and VERY LOVINGLY raised by a single black man. Said black man is the undisputed authority throughout the film, though he did not come from an affluent background. The respect he is given is unreal— like, he’s literally presented as a Messiah figure in Mako’s memories. Instead of being set up as a cardboard antagonist in the Rebellious White Male Hero’s narrative, he is a complex, human character.

God, just— so much of the cast is important just because they EXIST. There is no one protagonist, no single hero who saves the day. The underlying themes are that interpersonal relationships and empathic connections are powerful, that you don’t need to be The Chosen One to make a difference, that it’s not about being the strongest or the most aggressive person/country, and that romantic relationships are not the single most important/interesting relationship under the sun. Pacific Rim is important to me because it’s so much of what I want to see more of in my media.

On a more personal level, Pacific Rim kiiiinda nudged a long, close friendship of mine into a romantic one. We’ve joked forever that we have 100% drift compatibility, and said that clearly we were meant to be co-pilots. Joking about it made us realize that yes, we were super compatible and want the same things out of life. Eventually, we asked ourselves why we weren’t dating, so now we are. Pacific Rim is tangentially responsible for me having a girlfriend. Which is kind of rad, I think.