• sup bitches
  • about
  • tags and faves
  • art blog
  • ao3
  • >>ASK
  • >>SUBMIT
  • users online

    Reblogged from darylgrimes  228 notes

    normansreeds:

    i just wish people would stop pairing daryl off with every female he talks to. he’s so much more than that, he doesn’t need relationships to get fans, he’s interesting enough without it, so why do daryl fans keep intensely shipping him with every frickin’ girl he looks at?

    not to mention how much it tends to devalue female characters if they’re perpetually being viewed only in a romantic context to male characters right

    Reblogged from feministwalkingdead  105 notes

    Thoughts on “The Grove” (Feminist Walking Dead)

    feministwalkingdead:

    A brilliant episode. Amazing, heartbreaking performances. Beautifully written. Please assume I said this about a thousand times.

    Let’s talk about what was revealed in this episode: No surprise — Lizzie was the walker-feeder and rat-dissector. But it was also revealed that Carol actually did kill Karen and David. (To be fair, Melissa McBride has been saying since day one that Carol did it.) I still think it was a sloppy job and unlike Carol, but at this point, it is what it is.

    So, we have Carol, who is haunted throughout this episode — by Sophia, by what she did to Karen and David, and ultimately, by the realization that despite all her efforts to protect the people she loves, she ultimately has little control over how things will play out. It’s going to change her, and I look forward to seeing how.

    Despite the consequences of her decisions, she hasn’t been written into a corner like Andrea and Lori were. Unlike those two characters, she also hasn’t been punished, and she hasn’t been redeemed. Her path is more complicated than that. In fact, this episode absolutely cements Carol’s status as the most nuanced and well-developed character on the show. I’m impressed. The Season 1 Curse (something I just made up) seems to have been lifted.

    The show also did a great job of defining Mika in very little time. The sweet-faced child was a tender-hearted little science geek who had a very clear moral code and a playful sense of humor. (Compare this to what we knew about Sophia.) I’m happy they fleshed her out, because we didn’t need any more blonde sacrificial lambs on this show.

    Reblogged from astercalling  17,401 notes

    I wanted to show that men and women can be friends without having a relationship,” says del Toro of the relationship between the two main characters Mako (played by Japanese actress Rinko Kikuchi) and Raleigh (“Sons of Anarchy” star Charlie Hunnam). “Theirs is a story about partnership, equality and a strong bond between partners. It’s important for little girls to know not every story has to be a love story and for boys to know that soldiers aren’t the only ones to triumph in war. By

    Guillermo del Toro

    I think I might I’ve read all Pacific Rim related post on internet and this quote give me so many feels. Guillermo del toro is such a great guy. I should start to work on real life, but Pacific Rim is way much better.

    (via littlehobbitsoul)

    Reblogged from no-literally  610 notes
    Hi Ivy! If you've already answered this you can ignore but I'm curious. I know you're a feminist and also a Moffat fan and that's sort of news to me because I constantly see a lot of people complaining about how he portrays his women characters on TV and calling him sexist, misogynist, etc. especially after his adaption of Irene Adler). Could you say something about that? I'd like to know your opinion. (sorry for my poor English)
    Anonymous

    no-literally:

    ivyblossom:

    As a feminist, what I want from media is that women are portrayed as whole human beings with strengths, weaknesses, and motives of their own. That’s all. I’m not looking for female characters who demonstrate any kind of ideals. I’m perfectly happy to see women who are defeated, who need help, who make mistakes, as long as they are being defeated, needing help, and making mistakes for their own reasons and in the pursuit of their own goals. Even if those goals are deluded. Even if they’re bad goals. Male characters are allowed to do this. They’re allowed to screw up, make bad decisions, be weak, need rescuing. Why shouldn’t female characters have the same leeway? 

    Read More

    I feel awful arguing against this, because Ivy (whose fandom meta I greatly respect and adore) lays out a really wonderful argument for well-written women who don’t fall into the trap of “strong female characters.” And I love that argument. But I want to reply and say that I don’t think that’s the aspect of Moffat’s writing that upsets me, from a feminist perspective.

    Because, in the end, I don’t think see textured women facing obstacles, I see women built around a single archetype over and over (Moffat builds his men around archetypes as well, but he’s got multiple archetypes he seems to use as the basis for his men). I also see a disproportionate number of good father figures and without many corresponding examples of strong mother figures, and—in Doctor Who, especially—I see leading women whose identities are only special/noteworthy because of their relationship to the men in their lives.


    I honestly feel a little nervous posting this comment because I adore and respect IvyBlossom’s writing so much. But of my favorite things about fandom is the variety of opinions we get to see expressed across Tumblr, and I thought it was worth sharing an opposing perspective. So please know that I say none of this to insult or offend—I just wanted to offer an alternative view on the topic.

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    Reblogged from samcr0w  7,863 notes
    Reblogged from fursasaida  37,663 notes

    I want to see more girl monsters. Girl giants, girl dragons, hulks & trolls. Scylla and hydra. Girl monsters who are huge and whole. Teeth and plush fur and long muscled tails. Heads enough to see you anywhere. Gleaming green or brown. But girl monsters are usually zombies or vampires. Pale and thin, bleeding or dead. Not Lady Lazarus, not a phoenix from the ash. I want to see how you get strong without being broken first. Get strong and stay strong. Get big and bigger. By

    Terror Incognita

    #’getting strong without being broken first’ is like all i want from anything but especially girl monster stories  #stop making women small before you let them be big  #i am tired of revenge stories  #i am tired of all my heroines hurting

    (via aimmyarrowshigh)

    "I want to see how you get strong without being broken first."
    brb sobbing

    (via permapout)

    YES. Almost all monstrous women have to be broken and degraded first in order to excuse their violence, their monsterdom, because otherwise it would be too dangerous. Unpalatable.

    (via fursasaida)

    Reblogged from muchymozzarella  18 notes
    I know you say Grimm is unassumingly feminist but do you think that about Rosalee? Since she has been with Monroe he is pretty much her protector. They have a very traditional relationship in the sense she is more docile while Monroe plays the protector role.
    Anonymous

    muchymozzarella:

    ampkiss:

    muchymozzarella:

    I did emphasize that some of the women don’t know how to fight—which is fine, because many women do, many women don’t. Rosalie isn’t an action girl like, say, Nick’s mom, but she’s not just a prop to make Monroe seem more important. She’s important in her own way, and she is very clearly just as important as Monroe when it comes to dealing with Grimm issues. 

    Without Rosalie, everyone would be dead. This is a fact. 

    And she’s not docile. You’re kidding, right? Rosalie has personality, has character, and has strengths and skills, and just because she and Monroe are in a happy, loving relationship doesn’t mean she’s “docile”. She has just as much control in the relationship as Monroe does—they are equals, and Monroe doing the physical, fighting aspect doesn’t make him any better than Rosalie. 

    And the fact that you use the word “docile” to refer to a woman or female character shows that you have a very limited grasp of what feminism in media is. 

    Disagree with the anon but do think Rosalee as a character had rough patches for feminist writing—

    I would make the point that while the above certainly more true for S3, I think when Grimm first started pushing the “Monrosalee” thing it did her character a great disservice. For a significant chunk of S2 she wasn’t given- by the writers themselves- the chance to be as cool (and by cool I just mean, well rounded and individual) as she should be and seemed she would be in her first episodes. Now that she and Monroe are kind of “settled”, more of her initial characterization is starting to come through. I do think they robbed her of a lotta opportunities in the second season by making setting up her relationship with Monroe too much of a point of her character. I think that’s the only way in which Rosalee’s character was treated poorly for her gender; I don’t think the relationship dynamics between her and Monroe are one of the issues (especially given the fact that very little of Monroe’s character could be called dominant and he is a delightful little hipster) and I don’t think the anon has Rosalee as a submissive and not equal partner right. Thinking of her confidence and aggression in dangerous situations, her involvement and responsibility in the local wesen politics, her decision to inform the council as an entirely independent one, etc— I’m being real when I say I’ve enjoyed Rosalee this season more than any others, now that the writers have let her come into her own.

    Blahblahblahh /interjecting my opinion ~(O3O)~

    Nah, I agree, you’re right about that. Rosalee starting out was interesting, but there was more focus on her relationship with Monroe than her as a character in the earlier episodes, so I’m glad that the more recent episodes have improved her status as “Monroe’s love interest” to “one of the team” and established her as someone with morals and decisions that sometimes (if rarely) deviate from Monroe’s own, even while they maintain a good, solid relationship. 

    This season is doing much more for the female characters than the past ones and I’m glad for that. 

    Reblogged from muchymozzarella  18 notes
    I know you say Grimm is unassumingly feminist but do you think that about Rosalee? Since she has been with Monroe he is pretty much her protector. They have a very traditional relationship in the sense she is more docile while Monroe plays the protector role.
    Anonymous

    muchymozzarella:

    I did emphasize that some of the women don’t know how to fight—which is fine, because many women do, many women don’t. Rosalie isn’t an action girl like, say, Nick’s mom, but she’s not just a prop to make Monroe seem more important. She’s important in her own way, and she is very clearly just as important as Monroe when it comes to dealing with Grimm issues. 

    Without Rosalie, everyone would be dead. This is a fact. 

    And she’s not docile. You’re kidding, right? Rosalie has personality, has character, and has strengths and skills, and just because she and Monroe are in a happy, loving relationship doesn’t mean she’s “docile”. She has just as much control in the relationship as Monroe does—they are equals, and Monroe doing the physical, fighting aspect doesn’t make him any better than Rosalie. 

    And the fact that you use the word “docile” to refer to a woman or female character shows that you have a very limited grasp of what feminism in media is. 

    Disagree with the anon but do think Rosalee as a character had rough patches for feminist writing—

    I would make the point that while the above certainly more true for S3, I think when Grimm first started pushing the “Monrosalee” thing it did her character a great disservice. For a significant chunk of S2 she wasn’t given- by the writers themselves- the chance to be as cool (and by cool I just mean, well rounded and individual) as she should be and seemed she would be in her first episodes. Now that she and Monroe are kind of “settled”, more of her initial characterization is starting to come through. I do think they robbed her of a lotta opportunities in the second season by making setting up her relationship with Monroe too much of a point of her character. I think that’s the only way in which Rosalee’s character was treated poorly for her gender; I don’t think the relationship dynamics between her and Monroe are one of the issues (especially given the fact that very little of Monroe’s character could be called dominant and he is a delightful little hipster) and I don’t think the anon has Rosalee as a submissive and not equal partner right. Thinking of her confidence and aggression in dangerous situations, her involvement and responsibility in the local wesen politics, her decision to inform the council as an entirely independent one, etc— I’m being real when I say I’ve enjoyed Rosalee this season more than any others, now that the writers have let her come into her own.

    Blahblahblahh /interjecting my opinion ~(O3O)~