Seanan's Tumblr

Urban Fantasy Halloween Girl at large

last-snowfall:

geardrops:

swanjolras:

out of all the aspects of millennial-bashing, i think the one that most confuses me is the “millennials all got trophies as a kid, so now they’re all self-centered narcissists” theory

like— kids are pretty smart, y’all. they can see that every kid on the team gets a trophy and is told they did a good job; they can also see that not every kid on the team deserves a trophy, and not everyone did do a good job

the logical conclusion to draw from this is not “i’m great and i deserve praise”— it’s “no matter how mediocre i am, people will still praise me to make me feel better, so i can’t trust any compliments or accolades i receive”

this is not a recipe for overconfidence and narcissism. it is a recipe for constant self-guessing, low self-esteem, and a distrust of one’s own abilities and skills.

where did this whole “ugh millennials think their so-so work is super great” thing even come from it is a goddamn mystery

what fucking kills me is, yeah, maybe we got the trophies, but who gave them out

this is not a recipe for overconfidence and narcissism. it is a recipe for constant self-guessing, low self-esteem, and a distrust of one’s own abilities and skills.

Which is pretty much what mental health practitioners observe happening.

It’s also what I observed happening as a singing teacher: the older kids literally would not believe a positive word I said until I had proved I would tell them they screwed up/had done badly/etc. I did so in as useful a way as possible (“So this passage. We really need to work on this passage. A lot. This passage is not good yet.”), but with almost every adolescent I taught I had to prove I would give them straight-up criticism before they would parse my praise as anything other than meaningless “the grownups always do this” noise.

(via knitmeapony)

Important intelligence analysis

melannen:

Headcanon: Abed only got his job at SHIELD as a spousal benefit when they recruited Troy for their gadgets division

Evidence, incontrovertible: When everything else in Fury’s car was broken, what was still 100% operational? THE AIR CONDITIONING.

Bunny, related: Abed meets Sam while visiting Troy in the hospital and explains to him, scene by scene, why he is definitely the lead in a romcom, not the sidekick in an action movie.

(via tereshkova2001)

Sam Pepper handcuffs himself to women on the street, refusing to release one woman until she kisses him

whitestuffknowslimits:

thebobblehat:

trashbagtricks:

aka14kgold:

jean-luc-gohard:

celebreceipts:

In January, Sam Pepper uploaded a video called “How To Get A Girlfriend Easy” in which he sneaks up behind or beside unsuspecting women on the street and handcuffs them to himself. He then tells them they’re “his girlfriend now.”

When one victim reacts furiously, saying “No! I don’t know you! Take it off!” and demands that he remove the handcuffs, he refuses and replies with “We’re dating now.” She tries again, “Look, I don’t know where you’re from, but we don’t do this in America. Take this off,” while fighting with the cuffs. He refuses again, insisting they’re “going on a date.” She then tells him that she’s married, to which he says “No, you’re married to me now,” and refuses yet again to remove the handcuffs.

At the end of the video, another woman is pleading with him to undo the handcuffs, and he refuses to until she kisses him on the lips. Pepper appears to think the entire scenario is hilarious at best and endearingly misguided at worst, while the women being “pranked” are visibly livid, terrified, and profoundly uncomfortable.

NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE PRANKS.

We need to stop calling assault by white men on men of color and women of all races “pranks,” because it makes them seem lighthearted and fun, not like the violent criminal acts they are.

NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE PRANKS.

NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE PRANKS.

NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE PRANKS.

NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE PRANKS.

NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE PRANKS.

NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE PRANKS.

im throwing up

I would have beat the shit out of him.

I wish he did that to me. I’ll finally have a reason to cause major bodily harm to a dick who deserves it.

(via isanah)

Spider-Butts

jimhines:

Some of you have already seen Milo Manara’s cover art for Spider-Woman #1, which generated a great deal of unhappiness across the internet. As io9 pointed out, she basically looks like she’s wearing body paint. One of many complaints raised was that a male superhero would never have been drawn like this.

Au contraire, says some dude on the internet, who heroically stood up to defy the “Social Police,” those “preachy, bloviating, pharisaic shit-heads,” and to explain why everyone who was upset about this cover was wrong, and it’s really a non-issue.

What his point seems to mostly come down to is the fact that J. Scott Campbell did a Spider-Man cover just like Manara’s, and you didn’t hear the Social Police converging on Tumblr for an outrage-fest then! Total double-standard and made-up non-controversy. So there!

Let’s take a look at both covers, shall we?

Spider-Butts

Yes, there are some superficial similarities here in that…well, they’re both crawling. But where Spider-Man is clinging to a spherical mass of webbing and bad guys, Spider-Woman is perched on the edge of a rooftop, thrusting her ass at the city skyline for no particular reason.

There are some issues with Spider-Man’s artwork. For starters, what the heck is going on with his fingers? And his costume is almost as tight as Spider-Woman’s. You can see a few small wrinkles in his suit, which is a step up from hers, but they’re both wearing some serious butt-huggers.

Internet-dude’s whole rant sounds vaguely similar to the, “What about the Romance Covers?” response I got for pointing out the oversexualization of women on SF/F cover art.

So let’s take another look at these two covers.

Point 1: One of the basic rules of climbing is to keep your body/hips close to the wall. Or if you’re a superhero, to whatever surface you happen to be climbing. Which is exactly what Spider-Man is doing. He’s hugging his climbing surface. Spider-Woman, on the other hand…she’s not climbing. She’s posing.

Point 2: Look at how the two characters are drawn. Both are in skintight costumes. Spider-Man’s costume highlights his muscles. We’re seeing a physically strong character with random extra finger joints. Spider-Woman, on the other hand, is drawn to highlight the curves of her body, sans muscle. It’s not about drawing a character who looks strong or powerful; it’s about drawing boner-bait for young teen boys.

Point 3: Even if both characters were equally sexualized (they aren’t), you have to consider the larger context. I have nothing against sexuality, or against characters being portrayed in sexual ways. But when we’re consistently reducing female characters to sexually appealing/inviting caricatures, regardless of whether or not it’s appropriate to the character or the story, then we have a problem. When women are being drawn time and again in ways that prioritize exaggerated sexuality at the expense of all else, we have a problem.

The problem here isn’t one cover. The problem is one more cover. One more woman reduced to a sexual object. One more woman portrayed in a way that de-emphasizes any strength she might have — because women can only be strong up to a certain point, and only if they’re also sexually submissive to the male reader/viewer.

Are there exceptions? Of course. Are guys sometimes sexualized? Absolutely. But don’t try to pretend that the sexualization of men occurs on the same scale as that of women, or that men are sexualized in ways that rob them of strength and agency the way women so often are.

Or to put it another way? Double standard my ass.

Related:

Mirrored from Jim C. Hines.