a penguin of very little brain

Keeping things the way they are because that’s just how you’re familiar with them is problematic, due to most everyone in comic fiction being a white, cis-gendered guy. It’s not an overtly racist distinction you’re making, which is why you seem to feel you’ve come to it without prejudicial racial bias (“similar conclusions can be reached by different arguments”), but it actually IS racist by way of exclusion. “Don’t do something directly racist, but also just keep things how they’ve always been” is racist [and heteronormative, and sexist, and cis-sexist, and so on] because “how things have always been” are white, cis-gendered, and male. Therefore, you prefer things to stay white, cis-gendered, and male. The world has changed, but you want these characters to persist as vestiges of an outdated, slanted view of society.

“

—	Comics, casting, and race. (via jhenne-bean)

++

cake-light:

I don’t understand the desire to saddle every female character with children regardless of whether they want them as some lazy stand-in for a happy ending, particularly in sci-fi and fantasies. If you’ve earned that with sufficient backstory and evidence, like, FINE. Olivia Dunham and Donna Noble and Scully and Ripley canonically want to have children. Amy Pond, Hermione Granger, Kara Thrace, Katniss Everdeen - these women are all ambiguous about or uninterested in being mothers. So it’s problematic when a head writer or a fan art illustrator or a writer of fanfiction just sticks these women with children as though motherhood is always the inevitable and right and desirable end, even when their characterization directly contradicts that.

Even River Song falls victim to this trope because that is the image Moffat chooses to close on in the Library episodes. River, a woman who has never expressed any desire to raise children or be a mother, someone who (if her arc had allowed for any emotional consequence whatsoever) would likely have had some deep-seated issues with nurturing and parentage and abandonment - is “saved” in a purgatory/afterlife where she is forever caring for these ersatz, computer-generated children. Because children are shorthand for happiness in women’s narratives.

Some Nickelodeon executives were worried, says Konietzko, about backing an animated action show with a female lead character. Conventional TV wisdom has it that girls will watch shows about boys, but boys won’t watch shows about girls. During test screenings, though, boys said they didn’t care that Korra was a girl. They just said she was awesome.

“

—

‘Airbender’ Creators Reclaim Their World in ‘Korra’ (via meggannn)

I don’t think some people realise that this attitude is something that is taught by society—people teach boys they shouldn’t care about anything feminine, people make them play with toys that are gendered as masculine, people berate them when they do anything feminine, society essentially tells them that anything masculine is better, then people produce literature and film and TV that reinforce this mindset. It’s obvious that. it. doesn’t. have. to. be. this. way. Sexism isn’t inherent. Literature and TV and film don’t have to reinforce this mindset—entertainment can go against the grain; if people create well-rounded characters, kids have the capacity to accept them, whether they’re male or female.

(via watermeloncholy)

crossedwires:

thesmithian:

“…Times are different, and I think people are now ready to accept different versions of being Asian…”

more, plus audio, here.

CHEN: You know, when I first read “Tai Pan,” I was like oh, my God. This woman is ridiculous.

(SOUNDBITE OF LAUGHTER)

CHEN: It’s absolutely ridiculous. But I wanted to play it because they are so few leading parts. I mean, she was a submissive concubine, but she was the leading lady. And so I felt like so far from what I feel a Chinese girl would be me. It’s totally a Western version of Chinese-ness. It’s not at all authentic. I honestly didn’t know how to play it.

During my first couple of interviews, like auditions, they were frowning and just felt I wasn’t somehow Chinese. I didn’t fit in that mold of what they feel the Chinese girl should look, because I came from the communist China. The image is a little unfamiliar to what, you know, all these concubines or dragon women should appear to them. So I quickly transformed myself into that look, which the film industry in America would accept as a Chinese person. And “Tai Pan,” the character in there was one of those.

[…]

MARTIN: If you were starting today, do you think you’d have had more choices? Do you think that younger performers of Asian descent have more choices than you had, or not?

CHEN: Obviously, yes, there are more choices. Times are different, and I think people are now ready to accept different versions of being Asian. Back then, it was really one single story: You’re either an exotic flower, vulnerable, must be saved, or you’re a, you know, concubine that also must be saved - the white savior mentality. But today, you know, the Asian-Americans, as well as Asians appearing in films, are more diverse. And so today is a little better.

I mean, the fight continues. You know, we want to create as many versions. The more different versions that we present, then the less chance for stereotypes.

<3 <3 <3

When the path of a man and woman are going to cross, it’s always the woman who’s expected to alter her path to avoid a collision. In addition, women restrict their stride as compared to men, and tend to hunch their shoulders and not initiate or maintain eye contact.

So I did this research my friends and I started messing around with this. We found that if you don’t alter your path when walking toward a man, a lot of men will almost run right into you, or bump their shoulder against yours, and then turn and give you this weird look. The weird looks you get are increased if you stand up straight with squared shoulders and take longer strides. I habitually walk this way now, and I continue to get puzzled looks by men who turn around after I pass them and watch me with an uncertain look.

“

—	Own Your Space! (via andythenerd)

dcplanet:

If I don’t get pants, nobody gets pants.

Art by Theamat

jiggit:

The reason I haven’t reblogged the Chinese Redbud Woman post is because the translation annoys me. The ‘紫荆’ in ‘紫荆侠’ is defined as ‘cercis’ in my go-to online dictionary, for which I will grant ‘Chinese redbud’, but the ‘侠’ in ‘紫荆侠’?

That doesn’t mean ‘woman’, that means ‘hero’.

More specifically, it is the same ‘侠’ as in wuxia. Whenever you see a person introduced as ‘[given name]-hero’ or ‘Hero-[given name]’ in wuxia, the ‘hero’ (or ‘pugilist’, or ‘martial hero’, or ‘knight’) is translated literally from ‘侠’.

But — and this is why it particularly annoyed me to see that translation — when the person in question is female, they’re usually called not ‘侠’ but ‘女侠’, which is ‘female hero’. As opposed to a plain, default hero, I guess. It annoys the crap out of me.

So. She’s calling herself Chinese Redbud Hero, not Chinese Redbud Woman, if you must use the literal translation. I’d call her Zijing Hero because Chinese Redbud is a mouthful and you could just add a note that ‘紫荆’ means ‘Chinese redbud’.

dangertits:

skiptripfall:

rainbowfairyprincess:

I am incredibly grateful to my parents for giving me both kinds of toys. I preferred the dolls, but at least I know that was my own honest choice.

My mom wouldn’t let me have toys.

I still find most commentary on the sexist division of girl toys and boy toys to be rather lacking. Of course if is terrible that girls and boys are given toys that encourage them to enact stereotypical gender roles so young; this type of socialization might prime them to fill specific roles later on in life. But people are still undervaluing “girls toys,” equating them with passive frivolousness. And how sexist is that? The sentiment is that “gender neutral” toys, always verging towards “boys toys,” are constructive, educational, and worthwhile. Dolls aren’t. This is the kind of sentiment that dismisses the value of “women’s work” of care-giving later on in life.

“Boys toys” tend to be physically complex. “Girls toys” tend to be socially complex. The complexity of the imaginary play that children often engage in with dolls is intangible and made invisible early on—because you aren’t looking. It is so much easier for a child to say “look what I made” and get a pat on the back than to say “watch me engage.”

I played with lots of different types of toys. Sure, I liked to build things with legos. But I much preferred my dolls. And guess what? All forty or so of my beanie babies had individual personalities. They had roles, romances, they interacted with each other in complex ways. There were smaller subgroups of birds or bears. I used them to create a complete micro-society. But an adult passerby would see that pile of critters as a rather useless and excessive collection.

Understanding social complexities, the kind of play which “girls toys” encourage, is undervalued from an early age.

Let’s please stop with the “dolls are dumb” rhetoric. It isn’t helpful. It’s still sexist. The problem of gendered children’s toys won’t be fixed by allowing free access to “boys toys” for all, but by seeing the value in diverse types of play, and encouraging all children to engage in them.

Anti-Feminism Through Exotification: A Comparative Analysis of The Ballad of Mulan and Disney’s Mulan

lightspeedsound:

A paper I wrote a while back on Disney’s Mulan, vs. the Original Ballad of Mulan. I think it’s pretty cool. Sources are cited at the end of the paper, if you want to read more. I recommend it.

Read More

I don’t totally agree with this paper, and it is in ALL CAPS, but some interesting points.

girlslovesuperheroes:

I meet a lot of awesome little kids at conventions, and honestly, they are one of my favourite parts of those weekends. They give the best reactions — Batgirl fans throwing out the classic “EEE!” when they see our Batgirl, little girls climbing all over our Wonder Woman and tugging at her lasso, mini Supergirls putting their fists up to look strong. Girls love superheroes, and I delight every time I see little girls at conventions.

One of my favourite moments was when a girl proudly informed me that Martian Manhunter was her favourite superhero. Of all characters, Martian Manhunter, this great hulking green guy with a funny outfit, was beloved by a tiny little girl. She and her sisters bickered over who was the best in the Justice League right in front of us. I loved it. Five minutes later, our Batgirl had a brief conversation with a little girl about strength and being powerful. I’ve gotten dating advice from eight year olds –– “Kara, don’t see bad boys. Bad boys aren’t good.” Wonder Woman has crossed bracelets with many Wonder Girls. I’ve held tiny baby girls in teeny Superman rompers and been awed by the number of girls who proudly proclaim they met the real one that day. How could anyone think that superheroes are only for boys?

I have pictures of many of the kids we’ve posed with, talked to and played with, but I don’t feel right posting a face picture of someone else’s kid online. This one, however, I can share. This girl was pretty awesome — she marched right up to me at Wizard World Toronto 2011 and had her dad fish out a pen and a printed out picture of Supergirl to get my autograph. She schooled me when I stumbled over the spelling of her name, and then she marched off to play in Adam West’s Batmobile. There was just something so matter-of-fact about her love for these characters that she’d have planned in advance to get an autograph from Supergirl.

I couldn’t stop smiling the rest of the day.

Girls who love superheroes are the best part of being a superhero on weekends.

-Jenn