This is mostly a multi-fandom blog, mixed with things I find amusing/interesting. I take no responsibility for the terror your eyes will undoubtedly witness here. Feel free to chat with me or ask any kind of questions! I am not shy and am willing to help to the best of my abilities. The bolded is what I am reblogging most at this time of year.
Things I like:
Shingeki no Kyojin, Game of Thrones, Evangelion, Lord of the Rings, BBC Sherlock, Supernatural, Free!, Avatar: The Last Airbender/Korra, Pokemon, Naruto, Ookiku Furikabutte, The Avengers, How to Train Your Dragon, Disney, Harry Potter, Sherlock Holmes, Aitsu no Daihonmei, The Amazing Spiderman, The Hunger Games
Shit that is not sexist re: Irene’s portrayal in Sherlock:
- She is a sexual person
- She is a sex worker
- She is gay/a lesbian
- She is not 100% perfect 100% of the time
- She does not do literally every single thing on her own
Shit that is just generally not automatically sexist:
- A woman losing
- A woman needing to be helped/saved
- A woman being emotional, vulnerable, etc.
Shit that is problematic, if not downright sexist, re: Irene’s portrayal in Sherlock:
- The fact that she is sexualised in a way that specifically appeals to straight male fantasies when lesbians have a long history of being exploited thus in the media
- The fact that this is used to reinforce the harmful stereotype that lesbians ‘just need the right man’
- The fact that the way she was shown as being flawed was specifically set up to make her lose to a man in a way that reflects common stereotypes about women, i.e. they are more emotionally vulnerable than men, basically reinforcing the idea that traditional femininity = weak
- The fact that Moffat and co. went out of their way to add Irene being saved into a narrative where, originally, she needed no help, in a media which tends to need women to be saved disproportionately to men
- The fact that, again, they went out of their way to change it from a woman winning to a woman losing in a society where dudes typically end up the best off at the end of stories
Context, people. It’s all about context. If SCAN were a different story, then perhaps it wouldn’t have been the problem it is. But SCAN is a story about one thing, and ASiB a story about another, and the discrepancy between what Moffat read and what he wrote is the real issue tbqh.
YES. This is a great summation of the problems I had with this episode.
In the original Scandal in Bohemia, it is made quite clear that Holmes does not consider Irene Adler “The Woman” because he loves her, or even because he cares for her in any real way. She is The Woman because she beat him. She beat him, taunted him, and got away scott free to live out her life how she wanted, in a story written in freakin’ 1891. That is the POINT of Irene Adler.
And in Scandal in Belgravia, Irene Adler is only able to outsmart Holmes because Moriarty gave her the Cliffs Notes, and she STILL loses because of her lady!feelings, and finally she needs to be rescued (from the scary foreign-y foreigners, I might add) by Sherlock.
Yeah, that’s bullshit. That’s bullshit, and it’s NOT THE POINT of The Woman.
But then, when has Moffat EVER gotten the point of female agency?
that Kanye West got not only more flack, but a worse reputation for grabbing a microphone out of Taylor Swift’s hands and making a rude comment than Chris Brown did for beating his girlfriend until her face was unrecognizable.
#like she looks supercute and i’m glad they decided to do a pixar movie with a girl lead #but i’m kind of weirded about by how she’s a girl who does stereotypically masculine things #and suddenly everyone is lauding her as this PARAGON OF FEMALE EMPOWERMENT #SUCH A STRONG FEMALE CHARACTER! #like other disney princesses exercised their agency too? #ariel certainly did and belle certainly did #and like hello TIANA?? #it wasn’t just mulan #although she is my favorite of course lmao #but yeah i want merida and brave to get credit for doing something good #but i don’t want the other leading ladies to be devalued because of it either
Okay. Okay, I just have to type a response to this post because I see posts like this ALL THE TIME and I just…. want people to maybe be a little more comfortable about themselves?? I don’t know, in any case, here’s my rebuttal.
On the internet, even when you’re not anonymous, you’re hiding behind the facade of a computer screen. This computer screen gives you the courage to say things that you would not NORMALLY say to a person in public. This could be anything from negative, hurtful things, to extremely kind, positive things. And knowing this, it comes as no surprise to me when people say ‘Oh, I’ve only been told I’m pretty/beautiful/attractive on the internet.’ As though that changes the fact that you are, or something.
Listen, guys: people don’t just randomly go up to people and tell them they’re attractive. At least, often, and not all the time. It takes a lot of courage to tell someone that you think they’re pretty, and it’s not easy to muster up that strength to tell them in person, especially for a lot of people who are very active online. So, you know. Take that into consideration before you think that people in real life don’t find you attractive. I bet there are people there who think so. They just don’t always have the courage to tell you.
So, yeah. I only wanted to respond because I feel like posts like these are there to make people think about this, and think that maybe the people online are lying, or maybe it even just gets the poster thinking about how they wish there were people like the people they knew online in real life. And I just wanted to say: trust me, there are.
So no matter what, someone probably thinks you look amazing. They just don’t know how to say it. <3