malcolm-twrkd-with-ida-4-justice:
drwhothefuckyouthinkyoutalkinto:
I love this
Eh, while it’s great that these characters are independent, something about all these princesses of color not finding love at the end of their movies rubs me the wrong way. Just like how Disney patted itself on the back for a black princess but she was Frogger damn near the whole movie.
And it would’ve been a great opportunity to cast moc in romantic roles from that culture
^^^ I’m so conflicted because yes, always having a love interest is annoying but poc never get to have a love interest
Having the princesses of color not find love reinforces the idea that we have to strong and independent and aren’t needing of any support
But I do like it because it deviates from the norm
It might be cool if they had dudes in the movie who were interested and they had the princesses be like, “naw, I got shit to do, but maybe later!”
Cause then it would obviously be a choice, instead of a worldstate that WoC don’t get hetero love (I’m not even gonna wish for queer love).
This is actually a good example of the need for intersectional feminism.
- it is very common that white girl characters have love interests and finding love be the plot line and basis for all their stories and interactions.
- It is uncommon for a girl character of color to be seen as a potential love interest, in need of defense by a male character and/or support from a male character full stop.
This is because of the history of social devaluation of woc and infantilization of white women.
Thusly:
- it is subversive for white female characters to not have love interests for once and to focus on strength outside of male attention.
while at the same time
- is it subversive for woc to be love interests and treated with care and reverence and with support in relationships on screen.
The “norms” for two groups of women are different based on the historical interaction both groups have had to suffer under patriarchal and sexist/racist media.
This is why its okay to feel hurt and roll your eyes when you see people screaming about how michonne from the walking dead “dont need no man” because she’s too “strong” to want to be desired and cared for, while at the same time feel hurt and roll your eyes when Black Widow is suddenly too helpless to get herself free from a basic ass cage and needs to be rescued by her randomly inserted love interest.
@drwhothefuckyouthinkyoutalkinto @itsmikuisa @bougiebussy (the others dont have tagging on i dont think)
Tag: patriarchy
I swear to god I will lose my mind if I hear the “sex sells” fallacy one more time. Sex does not sell. If sex sold, we would see penises where we see boobs. Naked men would be on everything that naked women are on. Sex isn’t what they’re selling you. They’re selling you an impossible, pornographically fueled misogynistic idea of the perfect woman.
(via menstruate)
FUCKING THANK YOU
(via fozmeadows)
They are selling women.
(via goodbyesocialconstructs)
wsswatson: you know what’s really irritating when male academics constantly refer to men by their surnames and women by their first names like you’d never go to a lecture expecting shakespeare to be referred to as “william” but it’s not at all uncommon to sit through an entire lecture in which jane austen is referred to… Continue reading
I asked myself what style we women could have adopted that would have been unmarked, like the men’s. The answer was none. There is no unmarked woman.
There is no woman’s hair style that can be called standard, that says nothing about her. The range of women’s hair styles is staggering, but a woman whose hair has no particular style is perceived as not caring about how she looks, which can disqualify her for many positions, and will subtly diminish her as a person in the eyes of some.
Women must choose between attractive shoes and comfortable shoes. When our group made an unexpected trek, the woman who wore flat, laced shoes arrived first. Last to arrive was the woman in spike heels, shoes in hand and a handful of men around her.
If a woman’s clothing is tight or revealing (in other words, sexy), it sends a message — an intended one of wanting to be attractive, but also a possibly unintended one of availability. If her clothes are not sexy, that too sends a message, lent meaning by the knowledge that they could have been. There are thousands of cosmetic products from which women can choose and myriad ways of applying them. Yet no makeup at all is anything but unmarked. Some men see it as a hostile refusal to please them.
Women can’t even fill out a form without telling stories about themselves. Most forms give four titles to choose from. “Mr.” carries no meaning other than that the respondent is male. But a woman who checks “Mrs.” or “Miss” communicates not only whether she has been married but also whether she has conservative tastes in forms of address — and probably other conservative values as well. Checking “Ms.” declines to let on about marriage (checking “Mr.” declines nothing since nothing was asked), but it also marks her as either liberated or rebellious, depending on the observer’s attitudes and assumptions.
I sometimes try to duck these variously marked choices by giving my title as “Dr.” — and in so doing risk marking myself as either uppity (hence sarcastic responses like “Excuse me!”) or an overachiever (hence reactions of congratulatory surprise like “Good for you!”).
All married women’s surnames are marked. If a woman takes her husband’s name, she announces to the world that she is married and has traditional values. To some it will indicate that she is less herself, more identified by her husband’s identity. If she does not take her husband’s name, this too is marked, seen as worthy of comment: she has done something; she has “kept her own name.” A man is never said to have “kept his own name” because it never occurs to anyone that he might have given it up. For him using his own name is unmarked.
A married woman who wants to have her cake and eat it too may use her surname plus his, with or without a hyphen. But this too announces her marital status and often results in a tongue-tying string. In a list (Harvey O’Donovan, Jonathan Feldman, Stephanie Woodbury McGillicutty), the woman’s multiple name stands out. It is marked.
navayiskah: ravenclaws-wit: radicalveganwitch: vaervaf: victoriassecretpolice: witwitch: we probably lost a lot of medical knowledge during the witch hunts because of how many mid wives were persecuted, and how men took over the field of medicine. I bet a few hundred years ago a mid wife might actually have some kind of knowledge about conditions that… Continue reading
queenofattolia: This disconnect doesn’t just have to do with female characters, either. I’m reminded of that Tumblr post that compares two magazine covers featuring Hugh Jackman: a men’s magazine on which he appears bulging-veined, huge-muscled, and sort of terrifying and weird, and a women’s magazine on which he appears as a slim, athletic guy smiling… Continue reading
The absence of women in history is man made.
How petty
just look at babe ruth’s face tho
so confused
so lost
i love it
Jackie Mitchell…a bad ass lady I had never heard of.
From her Wikipedia page: “Seventeen-year-old Jackie Mitchell, brought in to pitch in the first inning after the starting pitcher had given up a double and a single, faced Babe Ruth. After taking a ball, Ruth swung and missed at the next two pitches. Mitchell’s fourth pitch to Ruth was a called third strike. Babe Ruth glared and verbally abused the umpire before being led away by his teammates to sit to wait for another batting turn. The crowd roared for Jackie. Babe Ruth was quoted in a Chattanooga newspaper as having said:
“I don’t know what’s going to happen if they begin to let women in baseball. Of course, they will never make good. Why? Because they are too delicate. It would kill them to play ball every day.”
Next up was the Iron Horse Lou Gehrig, who swung through the first three pitches to strike out. Jackie Mitchell became famous for striking out two of the greatest baseball players in history.
A few days after Mitchell struck out Ruth and Gehrig, baseball commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis voided her contract and declared women unfit to play baseball as the game was “too strenuous.”[5][10] Mitchell continued to play professionally,barnstorming with the House of David, a men’s team famous for their very long hair and long beards.[11] While travelling with the House of David team, she would sometimes wear a fake beard for publicity.”
TL;DR: teenage girl strikes out two of the greatest baseball players ever, teenage girl gets her contract voided, teenage girl plays baseball wearing fake beard
These guys were so fucking injured by a teenage girl’s awesomeness that they literally threw a hissyfit and hung up a sign that said “NO GIRLS.”
They gave up.
They couldn’t handle it.
Losers.
Teenage girls are amazing.
Here’s a friendly reminder of why the big leagues of sports aren’t co-ed.
It’s not to “make it fair” on women. It’s because men are scared of being beaten by women.
She’s from my home town! And after all the baseball games I’ve been to here, no one ever mentioned her at all. I only recently looked her up online.
Men are the fragile ones.
Furthermore, if your objection to [canonizing male slash] is based on the larger critique that female pleasure should not be what guides depictions of male sexuality, I would remind you, dear reader, that male pleasure is and always has been the guiding principle in depictions of female sexuality, virtually since time immemorial. Stipulated, you don’t necessarily fix sexism by inverting it; but straight men who clutch their pearls over the prospect of female audiences usurping their sexual representations are issuing quite possibly the least self-aware complaint in the history of ever.
Canonizing slash probably will not fix male-gaze based depictions of women, or cause everything to ‘break even.’ However, I also just don’t have a lot of sympathy for people who think an injustice only is one when it is happening to them. Straight dudes don’t get to defend the constant, gratuitous parade of naked tits on Game of Thrones (aka straight male fanservice) and then turn around and balk at the idea of making Dean Winchester queer because, horror of horrors, female fanservice! That’s hypocrisy of the highest order, and in this particular arena, you can’t actually have it both ways.
Man caves. What exactly are you hiding from?
misandry-mermaid: cimness: tothedirigible: pussy-and-pizzza-x: fat-ass-turns-to-flab: My Renaissance lit professor brought up a good point about “man caves” last semester and the whole concept of men having a special designated space to escape. And it’s really interesting, cause he called it out as what it is. It’s an appropriation of victimhood by men made to believe… Continue reading Man caves. What exactly are you hiding from?
Monsters' Queen 
