women's narratives

anonymous asked:

What do u think the radfem stance is on drawing porn? Like... I'm an artist & I depict sexual acts in art (I never depict anything abusive/BDSM themed/fetishy/etc, just plain ol sex) and it helped me explore my sexuality individually, esp bc I never saw stuff I liked drawn by other ppl. Is drawn porn/erotic art as awful as live action stuff even if youre careful to depict only consensual, safe and loving sex? Curious to hear urs & others' thoughts (Sorry for bad typing, the word counter sux lol)

I think it depends on the drawing itself and the content. Like the point you brought up about depictions of abuse framed through a sexy or romantic lens, but like I don’t see why we shouldn’t explore healthy sexuality through art.

I think creating a true women’s narrative of sex is important and this type of art could help women heal from porn culture and find our own sexual identity that isn’t coming from the perspective of the male gaze.

theguardian.com
Women warriors: story of Khatoon Khider and her Daughters of the Sun
Khatoon Khider used to be a popular Yazidi singer. Now she’s the head of an all-women battle unit with Isis in its sights. By Emma Graham-Harrison
By Emma Graham-Harrison

After what happened to Yazidi women and girls, I decided to stop singing until I take revenge for them,” she says. “Maybe I will go back to music, but I think this job as a soldier will be a long one.”

(As a side note: There’s dozens and dozens of these sorts of stories that are constantly mailed to me. I am usually uncomfortable posting them, as there’s a legitimate case to be made that they are wartime propaganda. Most I’ve seen have been poorly written, poorly sourced, and slanted to encourage cheerleading over critical thinking. What sets this one apart for me is its in-depth interviewing, and focus on who she is as a person over the ‘ISIS/ISIL/Daesh fears women’ narrative.)

(thanks to Becca for sending this in!)

Tell me again it’s not canon.

It’s in the music.

True Love, Tallahassee, Regina’s Price. Cues and keys and crescendos, intertwined, layered again and again, pinned to scenes with the creator’s approval. Operation Mongoose? A TL motif. Going Home? A TL motif. Sacrifices, magic, teamwork? A TL motif.

It’s in the wardrobe.

Red and grey and black and back again. Plaid–confusion, discontent. Deep blue–loneliness, searching for family. Shared clothing, further intertwined. Parallels and callbacks to past couples, inciting conscious and subconscious connections. Why do they share this look instead of them or them?

It’s in the scenery.

Gallant knights with golden hair all in white abreast upright steeds. Splashes of color reflecting mood. Mirrors reflecting each other. Seals and symbols–the Tallahassee and Storybrooke, the dreamcatchers™, mirrors. All mirrors. Unicorn mobiles linked to unicorn hearts. A black unicorn, an unused mobile–innocence lost, never gained? White horses, black swans.

It’s in the camera direction. It’s in the editing.

Iconic shots, tricky angles, cued reactions–focus on her, not on him–which mean something. Rom-com zooms, reflections capturing both, pans guiding our attention to the thoughts behind the dialogue. Everything means something.

And the text. Hell yes, it’s in the text.

The magic to transcend realms. Unstoppable. Unbeatable. Wholehearted understanding, from one to the other. Mirrored storylines and struggles. Intertwined fates–both share a True Love already, after all. Longing glances, jealous quips, situations that require the one to save the other, then the other to save the one. Ultimate sacrifice. All canon. “I saved you, now save me.” “With you, I always know.” “I know you.” They’re stronger together than apart, time and time again.

Yes, it’s in subtext. It’s in innuendo and acting choices, it’s in interpretation and suggestion.

But when it’s built into the very foundation of the show–the Savior meets the Evil Queen–it’s not delusional. It’s not unintentional.

Either the wardrobe department, the music department, the prop department, the actors, and the editors are all going rogue…or someone told them to put it in the music, the wardrobe, the scenery, the camera direction, the subtext, and the text.

Tell me again Swan Queen isn’t canon.

anonymous asked:

Sorry to bother but it happens that I have a friend who sees Supernatural an he says that Destiel will never be canon because Dean is too male chauvinist (this friend is not homophobic, he'd be okay with a gay couple) and that the whole show is male chauvinist too but I don't know how to argue it with him. I mean, I think that about the show too, but not so much about Dean Winchester. Maybe you could explain what you think about it?

Whoa, no bother at all - what are tumblr friends for if not proving RL friends wrong?

So, first - this has nothing to do with anything, but you woke my inner language monster, and now you’re going to suffer a paragraph of consequences, because chauvinism - now, that’s a word I haven’t heard in a long time. It’s a ‘70s thing, ins’t it? Male chauvinist pigs and all that. I know we used it back when I was desperate to be a Communist, and we comrade’d one another in a laudable effort to pretend the Berlin wall was still up and everyone was into LSD and free love and we actually had something to be angry about.

(Turns out the word comes from Chauvin, some officer guy in Napoleon’s army who was extremely patriotic, and that’s mostly what it means - how it came to mean “an attitude that the members of your own sex are always better than those of the opposite sex”, that’s something I wish I had the time to investigate.)

My second point is, why couldn’t someone be gay and chauvinist? Gay people are people, which means some of them are complete and utter dicks. I personally know at least two gay men who have horrific political opinions and are complete mcp despite being out and proud and sharing an apartment with a (male) partner and an assortment of cats, pianos and art books. I mean, in an ideal world, people who belong to a minority group should, like, avoid sympathizing for a majority group who’d have then hanged and quartered if at all possible, but sadly, this isn’t always the case. I still remember a thing that happened in Italy a few years back - a black guy who tried like nothing else to become a member of a Nazi ‘party’ and went all the way to court because they wouldn’t let him join. And he wasn’t doing it out of some cunning political design or anything - he actually held Nazi beliefs, but he’d apparently forgotten that, in the eyes of European Nazis, he was the ‘undesirable’ one. Whoops.

That said, I don’t see how the term applies to Dean at all. I mean, again - the definition of ‘male chauvinist’ goes as follow: “a male who patronizes, disparages, or otherwise denigrates females in the belief that they are inferior to males and thus deserving of less than equal treatment or benefit”. Now, I think I said before that when I started to watch the show, I didn’t particularly like Dean. He had this fuckboy aura, you know? The love ‘em and leave ‘em personality I just can’t stand in real men - and, well, I like to think even fictional men have to work very hard to be likeable when they’re like that. But even back then, I never thought of him as a male chauvinist. Sure, he was a bit of an idiot, but nothing more than that. Like, when he’s short and dismissive with women, that generally comes from a place of genuine concern - for instance, he didn’t want Haley to come with them to hunt the wendigo back in S02E01 because he knew she would get hurt, or worse, not because she was a girl. 

His default functioning mode is to lie to everybody, and his tactics involve, first and foremost, to maintain a safe distance from others. This normally translates into flirting and smiling, which come off as a bit assholish when he’s in a position of power, and as downright irritating when he’s not (for instance, think about how he is around police officers - the textbook definition of ‘little shit’). So there’s that, and okay. But when he’s around women who can take care of themselves, like Ellen or Jody, he never treats them any differently than he would men. I think he even discussed the thing out loud, maybe with Jo? How his main categorization there was hunter vs civilian, and not men vs women? I’m slightly feverish and out of focus right now, so I’d rather not check, but I’m sure there was something like that. And also: one of the things I like about him, and, incidentally, another argument to use against your friend, is that Dean never thinks less of a woman just because he’s slept with her. This, in my book, is the mark of a true misogynist - how they tend to divide the world between ‘bitches who won’t sleep with me’ and ‘sluts who’ll sleep with anybody, including me’. I’m currently locked in a vicious fight with a colleague of mine who’s exactly like that, and it’s truly amazing how he can both be pathetically grateful to this woman he’s seeing because, yay!, sex and companionship, while disparaging her every chance he’s got because, you know, that’s not how proper women should behave. And Dean - Dean’s not like that. The most glaring example is perhaps Lisa - how they had a weekend of dirty, dirty, dirty sex and yet when they see each other again, Dean’s not dismissive of her in any way. Just like he never says a word against Cassie, or those two hunters we know he’s slept with, because that’s just not who he is.

(This goes both ways, of course: when faced with a female opponent, Dean never underestimates her and never holds back.)

The thing is, I think your friend may be referring to performing!Dean, because, even though Dean’s not like that, the world he lives in - that’s a different story. Or, well, that’s what we believed until S11 went and shit rainbows all over our screens, because, man - turns out hunters just don’t care? That there are women who hunt alone and gay hunters who’re well-known and respected in the community and whoa, Dean got it so wrong all these years. And this, as many discussions here on tumblr have been pointing out for months, is the real game changer: not Dean’s feelings, per se, but what happens around him. Because if Dean had grown up in this world, and not his father’s - well, we don’t even have to imagine what kind of person he’d be today. We know.

Me: *thinks about the in the heights movie and all of the hype I’m giving it despite the fact that it most likely won’t feature any of the cast members that caused me to fall in love with such a production, the fact that it’s still a few years away so I have no idea if I’d still even like in the heights by the time it comes around, the ridiculously high standards I have for the cast especially in casting an all poc cast being my number one want (something Hollywood’s been notorious in withholding), the fear of adding foreign plot points or even worse SUBTRACTING important plot points, the fear of somehow removing women from the narrative, the fear of watering down such a beautiful story in general*

Me: *cries*

College Bloggin’

One of my teachers emailed me about the syllabus and added at the end ‘you contributions in class are superb,’ and I was gonna respond with ‘thank you, it is my last semester so I think I’ve luckily built up a lot of historical analysis skills.’

And then I got rid of the ‘luckily’ part cause I read on interesting article on how women often attribute their successes to ‘luck’ and things outside of themselves instead of personal hard work- which plays into narratives of women being passive vessels of their accomplishments instead of active participants.

So hell yeah I do superb talkin’ now, ain’t luck, I studied hard & think critically, hell yeah.

i feel like the narrative on women and makeup has become so muddled and confused and misguided. there is honestly an industry at this point based on denying that makeup has anything to do with patriarchy in any way, shape or form. despite the obvious fact that, no, the vast majority of men do not wear makeup–and yes, we still consider many of them beautiful without it, and without even thinking about it. 

the beauty industry has become attuned enough to the change in culture and women’s increasing liberation over time that they can no longer get away with marketing all their products as “fixes” for your “flaws.” no, they’ve actually co-opted feminist/activist rhetoric to sell their products to you. this imbues their product with a significance and a weight that, without this language, it simply does not have. sadly a lot of this language is similarly used by makeup blogs/vlogs/instagrams/etc without understanding that the capitalist machine has pushed this nonsense on us for years to dupe us. let’s actually take a look at some modern advertising in the beauty industry:

wow! it’s almost like “having it all” sounds familiar? hm, where have i heard that?

this is just one of dozens of products that compare their makeup to a revolution.

the beauty industry has been steadily using rhetoric to suggest that cosmetics bring women power and the like, such as:

but when all else fails, don’t convince women that beauty products will empower, change, enliven them, or make them assertive. just tell them it’s a part of who they are!

because how could the real you shine through without the help of some new foundation or lipstick?

there is such an absurdity to these slogans and such a sexism to the idea that these products are going to change women’s lives, bring them confidence, give them power or anything else. these products, nine times out of ten, are going to paint women’s faces in order to make them more appealing to the patriarchy.

it’s even gone far enough that women online have recently created a hashtag #thepowerofmakeup (?) to insist that makeup is not due to insecurities or a desire to please boys, but simply a personal choice and pleasure that exists in a vacuum and has nothing to do with anything else ever. this is the extent of the brainwashing. i don’t condemn these women in any way because their lack of understanding is not their fault and is a product of growing up in the society they have. to make myself perfectly clear, i do not condemn any women who wear makeup in any context. however the hashtag creator’s notion that “nowadays…it’s almost a crime to love doing your makeup” is literally baffling. makeup has never been more popular or beloved than it is right now, and the small group of people criticizing its misogynistic origins are nothing compared to the millions of women who feel compelled to spend hundreds every year on these products. it’s incredible to see women who do wear makeup portrayed as the outcasts, while women who don’t wear makeup know that they’ll have a tougher time getting jobs, be consistently assumed tired/upset/having a bad day, and be generally considered less desirable and inadequately feminine on the whole. 

speaking of the growing prominence of youtube channels, instagrams, tumblrs, etcetcetc centered around makeup and makeup products, i want to make a point. can makeup be art? absolutely! can makeup be fun? absolutely! can makeup exist totally separate from male dominant spaces? i’m not positive, but i think it’s possible. however, it is the dominant culture’s obsession with and need for these products which is harmful to women and girls. many will proclaim that, “i like how i look without makeup too!” and “i can still leave the house without it!” but, as someone who once constantly reiterated these phrases, unfortunately i know them to be denials in many many cases. i felt myself, over the years, insisting that i could leave the house without makeup, yet found myself doing that, at most, five times in an entire year. i told myself i liked how i looked without makeup, yet after two days in the house without a drop, i looked in the mirror and felt ugly, dirty, incomplete. and i know i am not alone. sure makeup makes you feel beautiful, but why?

if we want to talk honestly about makeup and the enormous influence it has on women and girls, we have to rid ourselves of patriarchal notions and delusions that makeup “just makes me feel good!” and embrace the idea that we can feel good, all the time, be beautiful, all the time, no matter what we look like, without makeup in any form. our choices do not exist in a vacuum, and there was a reason i cried hysterically to my mother at 13 for not being allowed to wear mascara. all women are beautiful, all the time. it’s okay that women wear makeup. we just need to start examining why we want to, and patriarchy’s role in that “choice.”

 Does It Pass The Aila Test?

We all know the rules of The Bechdel Test. In recent years, fans of more feminist-friendly films have included their own character tests, like The Mako Mori Test, The Furiosa Test, The Sexy Lamp Test, the list goes on. While these are all helpful (though comical) tools feminists have used to criticize media narratives, very few of them seem to empower or apply when viewing Indigenous and Aboriginal women in media narratives / storytelling.

As a Native woman, I’ve experienced disappointment and heartache from the way Native women were represented on film, television, cartoons, and other forms of media. From stereotypical “Indian princesses” to the distressing amount of physical and sexual violence in live action period pieces, it felt that a Native woman was not a character you were meant to love and root for. She was never a character you were supposed to relate to or want to be. In almost every role she’s in, she cannot exist without being a prop for another character’s story, and if she has a “happy ending,” it’s usually in the arms of a white colonist or settler.

I’ve created the Aila Test to bring my own concerns to the table when feminists criticize media. Not only should these issues be analyzed and addressed, but content creators who write about Indigenous / Aboriginal women should consider writing characters who pass this test. We need them now, more than ever.

To pass the Aila Test, your film / animation / comic book / novel / etc, must abide by these three important rules:

1. Is she an Indigenous / Aboriginal woman who is a main character…

2. Who  DOES NOT fall in love with a white man…

3. And DOES NOT end up raped or murdered at any point in the story.

Do you know characters that pass the Aila Test? Please submit them to this page!

Every time one of the One Direction boys gets a new girlfriend or gets someone pregnant I check their tag to see the mad conspiracy theories and the little girls flipping out. Seriously though, they all seem to think that pregnancy is only something women do to trap men instead of a mutually loving decision between two partners. Can we end this narrative that women are bewitching the men you like with their genitals?

One of my issues with Crazy Ex Girlfriend is not with the show itself but how people talk about it. A big talking point for the past season has been to say “the show is not about shipping, it’s not about who Rebecca ends up with, it’s about her personal journey” which yeah! is fucking awesome! especially since it’s important to have narratives for women that don’t revolve around men or marriage being the ultimate end goal. 

However, when non mentally ill people start saying this sort of thing, it can get to sounding pretty unfortunate, especially when people imply that Rebecca is too “crazy” for a relationship, that she can’t do anything until she “fixes herself” and finds her own happiness. Which is like… okay, I see what you’re saying, but Rebecca’s backstory clearly implies that she WAS working on herself back in New York, focusing on her career, going to therapy, and taking meds, which are all things that mentally ill people are supposed to do instead of pursuing a relationship. And she STILL wasn’t happy. So yeah, maybe happiness doesn’t lie in a relationship with Josh or Greg or Nathaniel but is she just supposed to be like single for the rest of her life until everything is perfect and her mental illness is completely cured? Because that doesn’t happen my dudes!  

For International Women’s Day, I want to tell you a little story that I just wrote my art history paper on. 


This is Judith Slaying Holofernes by Artemisia Gentileschi. It depicts the violence of two women decapitating Holofernes’ head (one of the general’s of the King Nebuchadnezzar’s army). Gentileschi is known for painting scenes during the 17th century Baroque movement that illustrated violence towards men. This is because whenever she was 18, she claimed to have been raped by one of her father’s colleagues at the university she studied art at. When she spoke out against him, the man went through trial but was never punished for his actions. Judith Slaying Holofernes is a story portrayed in the bible. At the time, the Assyrian army was about to destroy the town of Bethulia. Judith had snuck into his tent late at night with her maidservant, seduced him, got him drunk, and decapitated his head when he passed out. The next day, she had hung his head on the gates to the city showing that the entire Assyrian army couldn’t go further because of their dead general. Because of this action, Judith was seen as the city’s heroine. Gentileschi’s characteristics in this painting are shown to be very forceful and violent. She is telling this story out of anger through her experiences with men. To the audience, it shows that women (even religious ones) can be a lot more than what men can expect from them, and nothing is stopping them to get justice. And if you don’t think that is not just the most badass thing you’ve heard all day then I don’t know what is. 

Those broken women narratives, where a Black woman has gone through some kind of trauma and now just wants some time herself, but she must learn to open her heart for a man to be happy always irked the hell out of me, as someone who’s been emotionally, physically, sexually abused for as long as I remember.
The whole idea that a woman should try to find a relationship to fix her mental health problems is , one, misogynistic AF, two horrible terrible advice.
Me, and people like me don’t have a reference for what caring actually is. We’ve been subject to abuse our entire lives, it feels NORMAL. You feel like that’s just how your life is supposed to be. You feel like this is what you deserve and it won’t get any better. And we have a much harder time recognizing abusive behavior overall. This makes us EASY TARGETS for abusers and predatory people. And that’s not even touching on how women are socialized to take shit already.
Self preservation should be incouraged much more than “opening up and learning to trust people.” THATS the easy part. THAT Part comes naturally once you learn to trust your own judgement again which often means, taking time for your fixing stuff, focusing on yourself, learning the good things about yourself, spend time with yourself. Not jumping into a relationship with the first person who shows you genuine interest.
It’s like these broken women narratives don’t explore or even care about the actual heeling process, just how it effects the men who want them. They tell us that we should be available to men at any given moment, regardless of what our needs are, what we’re going through.

anyways grace and frankie needs to be canon not only so i can see jane fonda and lily tomlin kiss but also because of the interesting narrative of women of their age (especially grace) coming to terms with their sexual orientation. it would unfold very nicely alongside the very different story of robert and sol’s in which they knew their sexual orientation from a younger age but stayed closeted for several years. 

ugh ugh ugh i very much want older lesbians grace and frankie finally loving and understanding themselves fully. also… listen… the irony of the grace/robert and sol/frankie marriages is beautiful and NOT cliché or trite

anonymous asked:

glee is all about the white male savior complex + pushing aside women for the male narrative. so basically it's a ouat musical. you'll love (to hate) it

i’ll hate the show as a work of fiction but love the characters and actors as i always do

Did you know…

That you can ship m/m slash pairings without bringing up the canon female love interests of the men you’re shipping together in a derogatory manner, or outright hating on them?

That you can imagine two dudes getting it on without crapping all over their respective relationships with their canon female love interests?

That you can play out your slashy fantasies without actively trying to demonize the canon female love interests and bend over backwards trying to prove that they are the spawn of Satan and unworthy of your white males’ love?

That it’s not “activism” to use heteronormativity and the prevalence of m/f relationships in media as an excuse to kick women out of the narrative? (Why aren’t more people gunning for more f/f relationships?)

That it’s not “progressive” when the most popular same-sex ships of Tumblr consist exclusively of conventionally attractive white men?

Graphic Women: Life Narrative and Contemporary Comics (2010) 

“Some of the most acclaimed books of the twenty-first century are autobiographical comics by women. Aline Kominsky-Crumb is a pioneer of the autobiographical form, showing women’s everyday lives, especially through the lens of the body. Phoebe Gloeckner places teenage sexuality at the center of her work, while Lynda Barry uses collage and the empty spaces between frames to capture the process of memory. Marjane Satrapi’s Persepolis experiments with visual witness to frame her personal and historical narrative, and Alison Bechdel’s Fun Home meticulously incorporates family documents by hand to re-present the author’s past.

These five cartoonists move the art of autobiography and graphic storytelling in new directions, particularly through the depiction of sex, gender, and lived experience. Hillary L. Chute explores their verbal and visual techniques, which have transformed autobiographical narrative and contemporary comics. Through the interplay of words and images, and the counterpoint of presence and absence, they express difficult, even traumatic stories while engaging with the workings of memory. Intertwining aesthetics and politics, these women both rewrite and redesign the parameters of acceptable discourse.”

by Hillary L. Chute

Get it here

anonymous asked:

How do you feel about Trudy from Hap & Leonard?

let me preface this by saying that i haven’t seen any of s2 yet, so if anything relevant to trudy has happened in s2 then i’m not currently aware of it

anyways i have?? really complicated mixed feelings about trudy…… on a surface level i don’t like her but i’m always wary of when narratives push women characters as unlikable

i think she’s a really interesting and complex character. and on one hand i understand her motivations and her feelings that push her to do all the things she does but? on the other hand it does seem like she was kind of written and intended as a lilith type character so like… as much as i understand her motivations and want to feel for her, there’s also part of me that doesn’t understand it at all and just sees her as a villain

idk i guess at the end of the day i have mixed feelings on trudy. she’s a VERY interesting and compelling character no matter how you slice it though!

okay, so i was thinking about dottie and the scene where she buys the baby carriage:

a) her cover for planting an dangerous destructive object is a mother with a baby, because what does society see as more innocuous and docile?

b) when she’s asked to pick a blanket, she picks pink. she genders (in the way that society traditionally genders) her dangerous destructive object as a girl. we saw the absolute wreckage of the thing, while it’s wrapped in a pink blanket with all the connotations of a baby girl.

idk how intentional this is (especially the blanket), but i just really love that we’re equating women with power on both sides of this. yes, we have peggy kicking ass and being one step ahead, but we have dottie weaponizing the same sort of invisibility that peggy’s added to her arsenal. leviathan’s a formidable opponent right now largely because of dottie, largely because dottie’s playing by the same rule book that peggy is, and there’s this underlying thread of taking power right under everyone’s noses that’s pretty cool to see.