liamdryden

pergus:

so i watched scott pilgrim vs the world again last night and the fact that im still picking up on things that i never saw before astounds me, like in this bus scene after the fight with matthew patel there’s a fucking bokeh filter on the front of the camera so when ramona is on screen all the out of focus bits are rendered as little “x”s and scott’s bits are little love hearts but when scott asks ramona if they’re dating now there’s a little ding from the bus as ramona’s turn to hearts like omg

the amount of attention to detail edgar wright puts into his films is absolutely baffling to me

lions-and-snails

The basis of most arguments against trans people is that we are not who we say we are, that we are always and only the gender that we were assigned at birth. And so much of that is about having a sense of certainty around gender, that when you were born with a certain set of genitalia, then that must dictate your entire life, and the reality is that that’s not trueA lot of people are not comfortable with that, because then that means they have to begin to question who they are.- Laverne Cox

hermionejg

Anonymous asked:

ok I don't know how to word this but, I sometimes have trouble seeing the difference between a woman having control of her body and doing what she likes with it (in the name of feminism) and a woman damaging feminism by using her body purely as a sexual object. I don't know if this makes sense i'm sorry if it doesn't but could u explain the difference between the two? is a music video of a girl doing nothing but dancing around half naked empowering or damaging? where is the line drawn?

hermionejg answered:

For me personally, it has a lot to do with:

  • Who is making the decisions? Are the naked/half naked women making those creative decisions themselves? Does it come from a place of empowerment for them? If they’ve signed on as dancers (and have on some level chosen the gig) are they doing so because the industry is so limited in its idea of how women should be represented on screen or because it’s a good channel for their talent or because they feel empowered? Who is editing it? Who gets to sign off on it? Who picks the thumbnail? Who picks the pictures released to the press? What conversations are going on behind closed doors?
  • How does it work within the context of music videos (does it use tropes? Does it imply things it doesn’t necessarily say outright?) and what are the ways in which it challenges the problems with representation of women (especially women of colour) in music videos?
  • How does this work financially? Who is getting the money? Who has the power?

But the answers to these questions don’t result in an ultimate YES or NO or SEXIST or NOT SEXIST most of the time. The important thing imho is that we’re having these conversations, that we’re aware of the potential pitfalls, the potential strengths, and that we’re not just passively consuming what is given to us. 

Generally, I don’t see a problem with women using their bodies sexually if it comes from a place of power on their part. Also, if it doesn’t, I don’t know that that woman should necessarily be blamed —- instead we should look closely at the many different factors and decisions that went into her being in this position.

Basically, we need to talk a lot :)

hermionejg

hermionejg:

I want to write and take classes and sports classes and I need to learn to drive and I want to go to Mexico at Christmas and spend time with my friends and make new ones and read everything and run really hard and eat a lot of food from my garden etcetc and that is sometimes depressing or stressful to me because THERE ISN’T ENOUGH TIME but now it strikes me as really cool because there’s so much to do and we are alive.

princessofpersuasion

Meet the Blogger

tagged by: princessofpersuasion (Thanks!)

Rules: Just insert your answers to the questions below. Tag followers 

URL: jjc1138

Name: Jon

Nickname: JC, J-man

Birthday: 17 July 1983

Gender: Man (but fuck gender roles etc.)

Sexuality: 90% straight, 10% Idris Elba

Height: 5 foot 11.5 inches, because life is cruel

Time Zone: BST/GMT

Current time and date: 00:40 2014-08-27

Average hours of sleep: 10-ish (thank you self employment)

The last thing I Googled was: “windows 32-bit 64-bit universl binaries” I’m ashamed of both my boringness and my spelling

My most used phrase(s): “rad”

First word that comes to mind: quantification (was the first word after all the smutty ones)

Last thing said to a family member: “Excuse me” (for a burp that probably registered as a seismic event)

One place that makes me happy and why: Hyde Park in London when the weather is nice and it’s busy. I like cycling around the lake and seeing tens of thousands of people idling around doing not much of anything.

How many blankets I sleep under: 0-1

Favourite beverage(s): Innocent smoothies, especially the blackberry one

The last movie I watched in the cinema: What If

Three things I can’t live without: Hope, copious sleep, kind humans

Something I plan on learning: What the future holds *vomits*

A piece of advice for all my followers: “Fuck. That. Shit.” - xkcd (first thing i ever posted on Tumblr!)

tagging - bookiesnacksize, peek-a-bo0, yuecake (don’t feel obliged :))

liamdryden

maarnayeri:

Let us be vividly clear about this.

What the New York Times did to Michael Brown today was not merely slander. It wasn’t a case of a lack of journalistic integrity.

Highlighting that a black teenager was “no angel” on the day he is being laid to rest after being hunted and killed by racist vigilante forces is not an unfortunate coincidence.

The New York Times deliberately played into an archaic American tradition in devaluing both the merit of black life and the tragedy of black death.

They chose the day of his funeral, as his family, friends and activists everywhere have to grapple with a human being lost to pontificate about how he was “no angel”. Michael Brown was many things to many people; a son, a brother, a cousin, a nephew and another black causality of murderous police institutions and today, amidst all the racist violence he, his loved ones and community have had to endure, he was going to finally receive the respect and moment of honor he deserved and NYT decided today, of all days, to tune in their audience onto wholly irrelevant facts about his life - that in turn, transform the very injustice surrounding his death and the following police violence that plagued Ferguson into a national panel about whether or not his death is actually worth mourning and their language suggested that to them, it indeed is not.

This was hardly an accident or mistake. This is the perpetual hostility that is met against black life in America. The consensus is that black people deserve no respect and for black life to be legitimized and honored, we must meet a list of prerequisites. Subsequently, if black people aren’t valued, neither are our deaths understood as tragic or murders seen as criminal action.

This has been the atmosphere of America since its inception and much has not improved.