milesjai:

Why does lil Snowanna gotta be grape, hmm?

1 year ago on 13 January 2013 @ 6:45pm 314 notes

benefits of a gay friend:

justjasper:

  • gay people are unique human beings with varied interests, some of which they might have in common with you
2 years ago on 13 July 2012 @ 7:41am 3,684 notes

waltdisneyconfessions:

“When I hear “I’ll Make a Man Out Of You” during Mulan, I can’t help think about the irony that Li Shang’s voice actor is gay.”

I don’t think OP knows what the word ‘irony’ means… because if they do, eesh.

2 years ago on 26 January 2012 @ 6:45pm 330 notes

Why does it feel like network TV has unspoken rules for POC characters?

weirdgasm:

Here are some I kinda feel are out there for the past 4+ years:

  • No more than half of the cast may contain POC
  • These people may only exist as a support for the storylines of their white peers. Any spotlight on their characters must be a very special episode or hastily conclusion to a story arc that barely gets any attention
  • The home life and family of POC are almost completely non-existent 
  • Family members may be cobbled together from mismatch ethnicities and nationalities without protest
  • If POC characters are anything but submissive, stand up for their mistreatment or defy stereotypes, they will be demonized by fandom (fandom in general can be a bitch for POC actors) and their actors with receive hate mail.
  • The writing staff must have less diversity that the actual cast. Many cultural mannerisms seem to present themselves either from thin air or prevailing stereotypes rather than actual research or even asking the actor involved
  • The world that the POC live in must either be Kumbayahville where everyone pretends that there is no racial tension or that race-based incidents don’t happen or a metaphysical war-zone where racial jokes are lobbed at them nearly ever possibility with no reaction.
  • Traits that other characters have automatically become negative when a POC has them. Confidence becomes bitchiness. Headstrong leadership is arrogance. Sexiness or sex-positivity opens the door for slut-shaming. Intelligence has to be know-it-all behavior. Any display of anger must be linked to militant demeanor or savagery even when completely justified.
  • Under no circumstances must race ever be addressed with any kind of gravity, just passing jokes.
2 years ago on 19 January 2012 @ 1:55am 873 notes

oblyvian:

So lately I’ve noticed all the different kinds of girls on tumblr. The ones that have the pictures with all the notes? These five types of girls are basically all the types of girls I see on my dash. Minus the nekked girls, but I didn’t really want to draw that so :T 

2 years ago on 17 January 2012 @ 8:12pm 78,328 notes

For every trope (or stereotype) played straight in the media, there needs to be at least three examples of aversions, subversions, or at least some hanging lampshades.

No, being gay doesn’t gift you a pass to continue making fun of gay people through stereotypes. Stereotypes are only funny to people because of their familiarity. That’s a cheap laugh. And being gay and making fun of gay people through stereotypes CERTAINLY DOES NOT give you a pass to make racial or cultural stereotypes… ESPECIALLY if you aren’t within those marginalized groups (and even then, it’s the same thing as stated above).

The reason shit hasn’t really changed is because people are too fucking lazy to DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. Hollywood spits out the same shit and we continue to eat it up. Stop that shit. I’m trying. It’s not an easy thing, but if we ever REALLY want equality of representation and respect in the media, it’s something we’re going to have to do as a unified front. Numbers matter.

2 years ago on 12 January 2012 @ 6:26pm
2 Broke Girls has so many good elements that making it a good show shouldn’t be hard. Think of what Phil Rosenthal and Mike Royce—two producers with longstanding relationships with CBS—would do with the basic materials of a great cast, an interesting setting, and a provocative premise (one of the few non-tense moments in the panel came when the two stars discussed the show’s ties to the Occupy Wall Street movement)! But that won’t happen with Michael Patrick King at the helm, because Michael Patrick King is a lazy hack who makes an awful television show and doesn’t realize it’s awful because too many people watch it, a lazy hack who thinks he can get away with making fun of all disenfranchised groups by making fun of his own disenfranchised group every so often. Oh well. At least he pulled the wool away from some of our eyes.
2 years ago on 12 January 2012 @ 6:11pm 17 notes

waltdisneyconfessions:

“I hate when people say that Disney is being racist or sexist in their movies. People need to remember that the old princess movies were made in a different time and that all of the princess movies are set in a different time. Do you think a black woman would have a had a chance of opening her own restaurant in the 1920’s in New Orleans? If anything Disney is defying the stereotypes”

Um, no. Shut up. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

  • Who gives a fuck when the films were made? If they’re racist, sexist, sizist or otherwise full of privileged dickery, they need to be called to the carpet for it. To suggest otherwise is to say that you’re fine with ignoring entire groups of people whose reality basically means nothing to you.
  • The Princess and the Frog has so many issues of dealing with class and race, I don’t even know where to begin with all the problematic shit. I love the film, but it is full of fuckery that shouldn’t have flown in 2009 and shouldn’t be flying now. They didn’t have to set the film in 1930s ~Magical NoLa~, they didn’t have to keep Tiana a frog for 80% of the film, and they didn’t have to make a ~big deal~ out of Tiana’s ethnicity and background… and yet they did. They reinforced racial and cultural stereotypes and pretty much ignored the specifics of a religion outside of the Judeo-Christian paradigm and shoehorned separate entities into the Good/Evil dynamic. The fact that they did all of these things needs to be questioned and if you can’t see why, you’re living under a rock and it would be best if you get back under there so the rest of us forward-thinking, socially conscious people can continue to attempt to broker for change, progression, and equality.
  • Hate it all you want, but when I see bullshit like what I’ve listed above and shit like what happened in Pocahontas and Song of the South and Lady and the Tramp and COUNTLESS OTHER DISNEY FILMS, I will ALWAYS say something. Cry more.
2 years ago on 23 December 2011 @ 1:42am 371 notes

feelmysunshine:

renamok:

feministdisney:

She said, her tentacles twitching with dissatisfaction at this stereotypical media representation.

Something of note about Disney Villains: their features and physicalities are always exaggerated. And, I mean, okay, that’s Disney in general (with all of its ingenues with waists smaller than their heads), but seriously… if they’re skinny, they are rail thin (Dr. Facilier, Frollo, Jafar, Scar). If they are fat, they are ~greedily~ fat (Ratcliffe, Urusla). Even Gaston is exaggeratedly beefy.

There are, of course, good Disney characters that are fat… but they are always ~jolly~ and ~jovial~, so even if they’re positive, Disney is all about some reifying stereotypes.

But if the villain is of a different ethnicity than white, that is played to the fullest. Look at Jafar (and others) compared to Aladdin, Jasmine, and The Sultan. Compare Ratcliffe (who is also darker complected, and fey) to faux Aryan hero John Smith (who was really a burly ginger). Scar to Simba, Mother Gothel to Rapunzel, etc. 

Disney LOVES the DARK/DIFFERENT = BAD trope… which is really disconcerting to me in this day and time.

When I compare Radcliffe v John Smith, Radcliffe has a paler complexion though his hair is dark as opposed to John Smith’s blonde hair. Though as far as dark or different equating to villainy in Disney films, I don’t always thin it is so. For instance, in Atlantis the lost empire, the villains were blonde haired and seemingly nordic in appearance while the heroins turned out to be of french, hispanic, italian, african american and simply dark complected in Kida’s case, her being the most different of them all in comparison to one another. Also, I don’t think that Mother Gothel’s hair is too much an object of the dark/different- bad generalization in that though her hair is dark as opposed to Rapunzel’s light, Flynn’s Rider’s is also a dark brown along with Rapunzel’s mother and father. Also as far as large characters, admittedly a lot of the bigger characters are more effectively labeled as the antagonists than the protagonists but there are some characters who are larger that aren’t particularly jovial/jolly or at least their characters develop/bring more to the story than simply being the fat ones. Ballo from The Jungle Book is initially conveyed as a jolly character but as the story progresses, his personality develops into something more in depth and complex. Also Guss from Cinderella though he is a bit dull and theatric the premise of his character is that there is more to him that simply being large, mucle-y and a bit rash but that he is also moral and courageous (with a touch of cowardice) Though what I think the over all theme is is that a larger person has a tendency to be a lot more intimidating and/or scary then a smaller person and as is often the case in disney films, the heroin is most often also the victim and so in order for them to be able to be identified as both the small, scared victim and also the strong, avenging hero/heroin, the villain needs to be larger in proportion, be it through exaggerated features or characteristics such as fat(Ursula) or muscle(Gaston).

When speaking about Radcliffe, I was more talking about his size and his mannerisms, but villains having darker hair/eyes isn’t new with Disney either. I wasn’t able to sort my thoughts too well earlier, but Radcliffe is an example of Disney’s love for antagonizing ‘effeminate’ men and his size points to his glutinous greed. This isn’t to say that these things are intentional: this is merely one way to decode the messages sent by the film, and by Disney in general. Scar and Jafar are both examples of the Sissy Villain as well as the emphasizing of ‘dark = bad’ (Kovu, of course, later disproves this, you could say), as well as over-exaggerating a body type (in both cases, slender/slim… which could be perceived as ‘more feminine’/’less ~manly~’). 

Yes, Atlantis is different from other Disney films in having a culturally diverse cast, with Milo’s ragtag group and the Aboriginal-appearing Atlanteans. But the main character (narrowing it down to whose point of view is being predominately shown) is Milo; the white guy who comes in and helps initiate change for an entire society that were missing ~something~ until he showed up. I’m not saying that this is ‘wrong’ or ‘bad’, but it certainly raises questions. Especially considering that, with a diverse cast of characters, they chose to make the main protagonist (and Princess Kida’s love interest) a white guy.

Flynn has brunette hair, but his complexion is still a rosy peach similar to Rapunzel’s while Gothel has a darker, olive complexion. I’ve been told by friends who have seen the film that she appears Roma to them… and with the European setting and the documented history of the subjugation and mistreatment of Roma people, well… It just bothered me, personally. Not to mention all of the ageist tropes the film perpetuates.

Baloo, from The Jungle Book to Tale Spin, is portrayed as a Papa Bear. He’s easy going and easy living, but yes, there is depth to him. I never said that these jovial and jolly characters didn’t have depth - even The Sultan has depth in his interactions with Jasmine - it’s just that, by and large, if the character is ‘good’, that is their defining trait. Also, these characters are always sidekicks or foils. They’ve never been the subject of their own stories… except Baloo and Pooh, interestingly both bears. 

I don’t know if I buy the idea that the villain, to be more intimidating, has to be physically bigger than the protagonist. Something about that bothers me, but I can’t put a finger on it right now. I think that anything about a character could be informed through their behaviors, speech, and thoughts. Character design, even, should be informed by those things; not the other way around. When I think of a character, I think of personality first, looks second, and the looks are always informed by the former criteria. I actually love Ursula and the fact that she is bigger… but I find it troubling that only villains and sidekicks are ever presented as anything other than ‘fit’.

I hope I’m making some semblance of sense here. 

2 years ago on 10 November 2011 @ 2:37pm 890 notes

Fetishizing People of Color: The Downside of Positive Stereotypes

2 years ago on 6 November 2011 @ 11:13pm 250 notes