In case there was any confusion about where I stand on Tyrion: I have zero sympathy for Tyrion with regards to Sansa and Shae.
I don’t feel bad for him that his child bride doesn’t foresee ever wanting his dick. I don’t feel bad for him that the hostage his family tormented and abused refused to…Agreed on Sansa. I don’t like Shae in the books or show but I understand her position. It probably meant her death either way (although she didn’t need to exaggerate the details as she did IIRC). But then again I guess that could’ve been avoided by not resorting to prostitution to begin with. though I never knew for sure if Tywin came onto her or the other way around. I couldn’t believe Tywin would resort to whoring, especially since he never got over his wife so I kinda assumed Shae came onto him, in which case I have a little less sympathy for her.
I guess I’ll get to the little issues first, then deal with my big issue here.
- Yeah, Shae did need to “exaggerate the details” because she needed to get in good with Cersei/Tywin. Holding back would have gotten her in trouble for sure; she needed to convince her captors that she was cooperating fully.
Remember: Shae has no social standing and no political power. Her survival is contingent on pleasing whoever’s hands her life is currently in.
- It’s clear that not only is prostitution generally regarded as a reality for lowborn women with few other options — women who don’t have husbands to protect them, women whose families cannot support them, women whose towns have been pillaged leaving them nowhere to go, women who have run-ins with knights (who either rape them, or lie to get in their pants, and then leave them) — it’s also canon that Shae became a prostitute to get away from her father who was raping her.
So fuck you and your “could’ve been avoided by not resorting to prostitution to begin with” bullshit.
This could have been avoided if Tyrion treated Shae like her life was more important than having his dick satisfied.
But my real issue is your position on Tywin.
First off, we never hear Tywin talk about Joanna, except to blame Tyrion for her death.
All the talk about Tywin’s celibacy is from Cersei, who is not the most reliable narrator in the best of circumstances, but almost certainly wouldn’t be an authority on her father’s sex life regardless.
Second, the inciting incident given as evidence of Tywin’s disdain for whores is his exile of his father’s bedwarmer, who had been elevated basically to noble status since Tywin’s mother’s death. Now, did he exile her because she was a prostitute, or because she’d risen above her station? My guess is the latter.
After all, when do we hear of Tywin threatening women/prostitutes? When they endanger the Lannister reputation. Tyrion’s marriage to Tysha is not so different, politically, from Tytos’ relationship with his bedwarmer. After all, it’s two Lannister men treating lowborn women like equals. And Tywin tears both women down in gross, misogynistic displays of power.
When does he threaten Shae? After Tyrion defies his order not to bring her to court.
So, what’s Tywin’s real issue? That he hates prostitutes? Or that he hates threats to his and his family’s reputation?
And even if we assume that Tywin HAS been celibate all these years, you really think it’s likely that Tywin allowed a prostitute to seduce him into dishonoring his wife’s memory? You think it’s more likely that Tywin’s resolve was broken, after years of restraint, by an overture from his least favorite son’s whore, than that he came onto her?
Point A: It’s likely that he had not been celibate for all those years. He didn’t dishonor his wife’s memory by flaunting his whores, the way his father had, and he likely was not sentimental about them, given how little regard he shows for lowborn lives, but he almost certainly got laid at least occasionally.
Point B: Tywin blames Tyrion for Joanna’s death. Tywin is a twisted, vindictive bastard (see: Elia Martell; The Red Wedding). Tell me Tywin wouldn’t have gotten a perverse kind of satisfaction from fucking Tyrion’s girlfriend. Hell, he may have gotten the same kind of satisfaction from what he did to Tysha: You took Joanna away from me, watch me take these women away from you.
And, really, we have a ton of evidence that Tywin doesn’t need recognition to feel smug about these things. It doesn’t matter if he can never publicly take credit for the rape and murder of Elia Martell. It doesn’t matter that Robb Stark will never know who orchestrated his death. It doesn’t matter that Tyrion was never intended to find out about Shae. All that matters is that Tywin won.
Making up a cute little headcanon where a teenage girl in a phenomenally dangerous situation is the corrupting influence on Tywin Lannister’s ~chivalrous and noble character~ is misogynistic and gross. Honestly. How much of a mental backflip are you doing, that you’re not certain Tywin has more agency than Shae?
And, even if by some act of God (out of character and against all evidence) it became canon that Shae came onto Tywin: Shae has a vested interest in her own survival. She doesn’t owe Tyrion shit, given that he got her into this situation in the first place. Hating on Shae for doing everything she can to stay alive is still victim blaming bullshit, and it needs to stop.
Ridiculous Acts of Rebellion
Okay, tumblr, here’s the deal. I’m trying to collect stories of ridiculous acts of rebellion—Things you did to break the rules simply because you felt a need to break the rules. Not because you were taking a moral stand against rules you felt were unfair. Not because the rules hindered your fun. Not because you felt destructive. I’m looking for instances of rule breaking that accomplished nothing aside from that sense of satisfaction you get from showing that you can.
My story: The high school I attended had a dress code that required everything to be solid color, even your socks. I had a pair of red and black striped thigh-high socks that I would wear a few times a year, just because sometimes I need to break a few rules.
Do you have a similar story to share? If so, please either reblog this post and add it or submit it to my blog. The reason behind this is related to a conversation I had with a coworker today.
Thanks for your help!
My entire elementary education was in parochial schools. The first one (K-5) was extremely relaxed and liberal. The second (6-8) was extremely structured, and run by some extremely structured people who explicitly did not want me there (which I’ve talked about in other posts).
So one time, I found a packet of stick-on earrings in an old binder, stuck one on my nostril like a nose-ring, and wore it to school.
Now, the school had a strict (and ugly) uniform. That’s basically undeniable.
But the uniform was not my issue. The issue was that these people already didn’t like me, so why not dissent just for the fuck of it?
Throughout the day, I crossed paths with the principal (a nun who was definitely not the president of my fan club) a few times, and every time I would catch her eyeballing me, and every time I would just eyeball her right back.
Oh, is there a problem, Sister? Because until you name your issue, I’m going to pretend I have no idea what’s making your eye twitch like that.
It wasn’t until the end of the day, as we were all lining up to leave, that she broke down and asked me to “please take that thing off [my] nose.”
Joffrey Baratheon, A Clash of Kings (via incorrectgotquotes)
This would make so much more sense as a Robert Baratheon quote :(
petition to ban “i kissed a girl” from all queer girl fanmixes 2k14
"It’s not what good girls do, not how they should behave."
If she was actually lesbian, bisexual, pansexual, etc, she wouldn’t say that.
I’m sorry, are you a woman who’s into other women?
Because if you’re not, then you’re not any kind of authority on what “actual lesbian/bisexual/pansexual/etc.” women would say (or think… or feel…)
I AM a bisexual woman, and I understand that what society tells me “good girls do” is not always in line with what I actually do.
Like, it takes an act of willful ignorance to read that line as “Katy Perry thinks women who are attracted to other women are bad.”
No. Katy Perry probably thinks society tells us that “good girls” don’t sexually experiment, and especially not for their own pleasure.
Katy Perry might even be acknowledging a conflict between her identity as a “good girl” and these desires she has that “good girls” supposedly don’t.
And as a bisexual woman: yes, that’s a thing that I would talk about. The conflict between how you’re raised and how you feel can be kind of a big deal, ESPECIALLY when you’re still figuring out your sexuality.
On that note:
Bisexuals who are figuring out/coming to terms with their sexuality (experimenting, etc.) are not “fake” bisexuals. They are not “bad” bisexuals.
They may be inexperienced, insecure, annoying, or whatever else, but they define their sexuality, not you.
So don’t you fucking dare tell fucking anyone “if you were actually [bisexual] you wouldn’t [say/do/think/feel] that.”
Don’t you fucking dare.
It is not now, nor will ever be, your place.
- Customer: I know you work here, but do you actually garden?
- Me: No, but I'm pretty knowledgeable. What can I help you with?
- Customer: Maybe you can find me someone who actually gardens? A specialist or something? I need someone who really knows about these kinds of things. I have these bugs all over my trees...
- [shows me phone picture of caterpillars on an evergreen bough]
- Me: Those are caterpillars. I have a product here that's a pesticide for evergreen trees which claims to work against caterpillars.
- [Customer grabs a different product off the shelf -- one *not* for evergreen trees and which *doesn't* claim to work against caterpillars]
- Customer: I'm just going to try this one. This will work.
Pro tip: If you have an X brand mower, with Y” blades, with Z wheel drive, bought in the past five years, and I sell you an X brand drive belt designed for Z wheel drive mowers with Y” blades from 2009 and later, the problem is not that I sold you the wrong belt, the problem is that you don’t know how to fucking install it.
Anonymous asked: In regard to your reblog about there being no white people in the avatar universe I must ask if you think that most of the characters are blended to make the audience see themselves in the characters? For example, aang looks very white but also clearly modeled off of Asian monks and katara and sokka are darker skinned but look white sometimes. Animation is about making people see themselves in the art so would you agree with this?
At what point do Sokka or Katara ever look white in the show? They were pretty much consistently brown/Inuit looking characters and I can’t ever recall seeing them portrayed as otherwise outside of the occasional scene with bright white light. Aang may look white to you, but he is very clearly modeled after monks and Asian designs as is Toph Beifong.
This is a show that was made specifically with the intention of using Asian and Inuit culture to create a fantasy world. In every form of media we are flooded with stories revolving around white characters, so it’s incredibly damaging when people say that there are characters in the Avatar world who are white when the creators of the show have gone out of their way to produce something that is so very clearly based on Asian and Inuit people. I’m not saying you can’t relate to a character, but relating to a character by whitewashing them so you can “see yourself” in the story is racist and it erases what little media presence minorities have on television.
That last statement about animation might be true if we were talking about a show that was about a talking trashcan or something, but this is an amazingly detailed animated show revolving around humans, so the viewer is presented with a specific character view that isn’t left to interpretation. Please don’t think there are any white characters in the Avatar world because that’s a completely inaccurate and harmful view to have.
You know what they might not look entirely white, but when have you seen an Asian boy with extremely big, natural grey eye color an Inuit with round big blue eyes and Hindu/African like features. A Japanese (people assume this is the fire nation nationality) with such amassing looking beards like the Arab men and honey colored eyes. A Chinese with green eyes and strong facial structure like the westerners or Africans. Just like you don’t see a white person in the avatar universe I don’t see any northeast Asians in it. Yes the culture is clearly I mean duh. You have to be stupid not to notice is mostly Asian but that doesn’t mean the there is a specific race in it. Is just a big beautiful blend of all of them.
No. The animation style in Avatar is obviously inspired by anime (not ACTUALLY anime, because it’s produced in the West), which is a Japanese animation style.
Characters depicted in this style should be assumed to be Asian, if not specifically Japanese, because this is a style that was developed IN Japan to depict JAPANESE characters.
Believe it or not, there IS physiological diversity among Asian cultures.
Some Asians CAN grow impressive beards.
Some Asians DO have strong bone structure.
Some Asians have naturally big eyes.
And, even if Asian people do not ever exactly match the character designs in Avatar, Avatar is a cartoon.
Cartoons take stylistic liberties.
Given the range of liberties anime often takes with character design, the fact that the primary physical difference between all the nations is EYE COLOR (water tribe/blue, earth nation/green, fire nation/gold, air nomads/grey) is extremely minor!
With few exceptions, everyone with hair has either black/dark brown or grey/white hair (no pink, no blue, no blonde).
With VERY few exceptions, everyone’s hair is straight.
Everyone’s skin tones are consistent with asiatic populations.
So it’s VERY weird to assert that — because people’s EYECOLOR isn’t consistent with what’s common in Asia — these characters don’t look Asian.
On a related note: why would anyone design a world inspired ENTIRELY by Asian cultures — their religions, their clothes, their architecture, their script — and then populate it with white people?
Please take a moment to consider why you’re opposed to all the characters being Asian, when it’s clearly consistent with both the animation style and the story in question for them to be so, and when the creators have specifically stated that they are Asian.
Anonymous asked: I personally think the song anaconda is still objectifying women. It's a song filled with half naked women to begin with, no half naked men. Nicki may have the power but she's still trying to sell women by stripping them half naked. The fact that women are seen half naked everywhere on the media but men aren't is objectifying to begin with. Women are people not sex objects to show openly for entertainment. The song might have a good meaning but it's still a miss and pretty bad for women imo.
Okay, look, I don’t know why I’m suddenly getting anons about Nicki Minaj/Anaconda, because before I started getting these anons, I had literally nothing on my blog about her or her song, and I am honestly not the best person to ask.
I’m going to respond to this anon, because there’s a lot in this message that rubs me the wrong way, but anyone who wants to message me about this in the future, please do us all a favor and don’t.
I am not an authority on this.
I’m just loud and well-read.
Yes, I think Nicki Minaj’s Anaconda is feminist. I think she made a lot of very interesting artistic choices. I think she had a clear agenda — a clear point — she wanted to communicate, and I think a lot of people got it.
But I don’t think you got it, and I think maybe that’s because you are confused about how objectification works.
- That “Women are seen half naked everywhere on the media but men aren’t is objectifying” may be true, but has nothing to do with this video.
The objectification of women in the majority of media does not mean that all media containing half-naked/sexy/sexual women is sexually objectifying them.
- The fact that the dancers are half-naked means jack-shit, because Nicki is half-naked, too.
The dancers are dressed just like she is.
They are dancing just like she is.
They are in the same scenarios she is.
Basically, they are not more sexualized than she is.
So you can back up with your bullshit about how she’s trying to “sell women by stripping them half naked.”
If you’re conceding that Nicki has power, and her dancers are depicted in the exact same way she is, then please consider that the connection we’re supposed to draw is that the dancers and Nicki are equals, and therefore all are subjects, not objects.
- Women can be sexy and desirable, yet not be objectified.
If they want to show themselves (even for entertainment!), and, as they do, say “I’m showing myself, but I still belong to me, and no matter what you see, you can’t touch unless I say so,” I support that.
Which, btw, is literally what NM does in this video.
She’s all up on Drake, but the minute he lays a hand on her, she’s out.
Because no matter what she HAS done, with him or other dudes, or how she dresses, or what she talks about, she’s in charge of her body, and that’s such an important thing to show.
If you want to insist that this video is “bad for women” because it doesn’t depict enough half-naked men, or because women being sexy/scantily clad is always objectification, I’m going to keep thinking you’re wrong.
Those really seem like your main complaints: society is sexist, men objectify women, so depicting women as sexy (while not showing any sexy men) is a step backwards.
And I think that’s an inane position to take, because it’s refusing to consider Anaconda on its own terms.
You’re insisting that a video BY a sexy, talented woman ABOUT sexual agency, that celebrates black women and black women’s bodies, is unfeminist, and I think that’s bizarre.
Like, that’s where I’m at.
Ok, I am not even going to read Allegiant, for two reasons.
- Adding additional POV characters in the final book of a trilogy that has so far been told exclusively from a single individual’s POV is an act of cowardice.
One of my biggest complaints about The Hunger Games is that the first-person POV basically removes any tension over whether Katniss will survive, because OBVIOUSLY Katniss will survive. She’s telling the story.
Hm, if we need someone besides Tris to tell the story, I wonder what’s going to happen to Tris????
Such mystery! Very writing! Wow!
- Tobias’ point of view (I made it exactly two chapters in) is indistinguishable from Tris’, in terms of style. He does not have his own “voice.”
If you are writing POVs of different characters, they should be distinct. Have distinct manners of thinking; different ways of expressing themselves; different ways of observing the world.
Tris and Tobias don’t, and I seriously doubt that was a conscious decision by the author.
I’m 98% sure it’s just bad writing.
Question: “Faction names” (spoilers?)
Okay, so I’m reading the Divergent series, I’m in Insurgent, one of the characters just made up a fake identity for one of her peers, and he corrects her, “Joshua isn’t an Abnegation name.”
Which confuses and frustrated me for two reasons.
- People transfer between factions.
He, himself, transferred to Abnegation from a different faction.
And — with the exception of nicknames (Beatrice/Tris, Tobias/Four), there hasn’t been any indication that it’s common practice to change your name to match your faction’s “culture.”
So it shouldn’t be glaringly weird for an adult member of a faction to have a non-faction name.
- There is not a clear naming convention to be violated.
Honestly, most of the characters have pretty “normal”/common names.
It’s not like The Hunger Games where each district has distinct naming habits (I.E., District 1’s names refer to luxury/power — Marvel, Glimmer, Cashmere, Gloss; District 11’s names refer to agriculture/harvest — Rue, Thresh, Seeder, Chaff).
The names in Divergent are not like that, nor is there another established pattern in the text.
And clearly the naming conventions that would define Joshua as a non-Abnegation name are not clearly established in-world; after all, if names were faction-specific, it would be immediately obvious that — say — Tris’ parents weren’t born in Abnegation, which is something that comes as a huge surprise to her, and she’s characterized as being particularly clever.
This honestly reminds me a lot of Christopher Paolini’s assertion that place names in the Inheritance Cycle give strong hints about the cultures that founded them because his races have distinct languages.
When the reality is that his languages are essentially interchangeable and basically consist of lots of overkill on the letters K and Z.
Like, what circle-jerk masturbatory author crap is this?
"Oh, I’m so deep! My book is SO complex! LOOK AT MY WORLDBUILDING! THE FACTIONS HAVE DISTINCT CULTURAL NOMENCLATURES, EVEN THOUGH THAT IS NOT EVIDENT IN ANY WAY AND DOES NOT MAKE ANY SENSE IN THE SOCIAL SYSTEM I MYSELF ESTABLISHED AS THE CORE OF THEIR CULTURE!!!!"
The fragility of the male ego is embarassing
Is it though? Is it really surprising that men, who are told to be stoic, emotionless gods their whole childhoods have issues with their self image? Is it really embarassing? Or is the social expectations for men to be emotionless the embarrassing thing here?
Nope, the fragility of the male ego is what’s embarassing, because this post is about my experience with grown men who acted like screaming children when I didn’t let them bully me, not about teh poor menz who can’t crey in publick.
I wrote this post after my uncle wrote a facebook rant about me, because I called him a bigot for supporting George Zimmerman.
He posted a facebook rant about his “20-something family member” who “doesn’t even understand how the law workds” calling him unkind names.
Then he posted another crying rant after I unfriended him.
He tried to call me at work (on a day I never work there) and complained to my father that I wasn’t answering the phone.
He knows my home phone number. He lives across the street. But he called me at work.
Like an adult.
This was the same week that my (ex)boyfriend broke up with me, via a stream of insults, but insisted that any of my criticisms of him were just out of “spite.”
If he hurts my feelings, it’s because he’s being honest.
If I hurt his feelings, it’s because I’m spiteful.
He said that me calling him a coward was a “denial of his masculinity” and called me five times in a row to demand I take it back.
After my boyfriend broke up with me, I came home and went up to my room to be by myself.
My father threw a temper tantrum because I was “ignoring” him.
How rude of me to not want to be around him when he wants people to be around!
How dare I quietly take some personal space!
I said “hi” to him when I got home. I was polite to him. But then I went upstairs to check tumblr and watch youtube or whatever.
And he threw a fucking fit.
I had a week where these three grown men acted like giant toddlers when faced with the fact that their delicate feelings are not the most important thing in my life.
This isn’t a post saying that it’s embarrassing for men to have feelings.
This is a post saying it’s embarrassing that men act like they’re better than you are — like they deserve to be treated better than they treat you — but if you act like you think your opinion is as important, your needs as valid, and you don’t back down, they completely fall apart.
Book Rant: Divergent and 3/4 of Insurgent (Spoilers, obv)
Fair Warning: I am not at all happy with this book(s). I have been seething about them all day.
I know I haven’t written a proper book rant in a while, and many of my followers may not have realized this, but this is a thing I do.