/// in case you can’t tell I encountered Jane Foster hate today and when that happens my rage lights up with the power of a thousand suns
#jane foster #better than ur fave dudes #better than MY FAVE DUDES
Soooooo sick of watching people argue over whether Hemsworth or Hiddleston is the better actor and yet completely disregarding Jaime Alexander (who had even less to work with than Hemsworth did but did a brilliant job) or Natalie Portman, who has a substantial resume and was acting before EITHER Hemswroth or Hiddleston mattered.
Like I get being sick that one white, male actor is getting all the attention, but how about instead of trying to shift the focus onto another white man we talk about people who actually need the spotlight/your fucking basic respect. (OH NO! SHE’S TOO THIN! SHE SMILES TOO MUCH! HER CHARACTER FIGHTS TOO MUCH/SHE DOESN’T FIGHT AT ALL! I HAVE NO CAPACITY FOR CRITICAL ENGAGEMENT WITH CHARACTERS WHO AREN’T MEN AND FEMALE CHARACTERS MAKE ME ANGRY!!!!11111!!!!!!)
I think Verity and Loki need to pilot a Jaeger together, because the world definitely needs yet another Pacific Rim AU
I’m gonna do it I’m gonna do the thing.
I was noticing a very distinct lack of Verity in the AoA tags, so I threw together a quick mess of a doodle to try and alleviate that issue. My apologies for the uncreative background, I’ll do something more interesting next time.
So, here’s a thought:
The types of fandom that are most often considered traditional and acceptable, and which are often either male-dominated or coded as masculine, tend to be acquisitive, whether in terms of knowledge (obscure trivia) or merchandise (collectibles). Whereas, by contrast, the types of fandom most often considered insincere, non-serious or “unreal”, and which are often either female-dominated or coded as feminine, tend to be creative, such as making costumes, writing fanfic and drawing fanart.
Which is arguably an interesting expression of gender dynamics within fandom, in the sense of being a direct response to gender representation within the canon of particular franchises: namely, that because men, and particularly straight white cismen, are so ubiquitous within popular narrative(s), they have less need to create personal fan interpretations in order to see themselves represented, or to correct/ameliorate stereotypical portrayals; whereas women - and, indeed, members of any other group likely to suffer from poor representation - do.
Which isn’t to say that it’s impossible to be both an acquisitive and a creative fan - not by any stretch of the imagination. Nor am I trying to say that the only reason someone might be an acquisitive fan is because they’re complacent about issues of bias and representation, or that the only reason someone might be a creative fan is because they want to address an issue in the canon. Some people like to collect, some like to make, and some like both, or neither. It’s fine! But I do think that, when it comes to conversations about Fake Geek Girls and what being a “real fan” means - conversations which tend to be strongly gendered - the split between acquisition/creation tends to follow gender lines, too: that guys who know All The Facts and buy All The Merch are the REAL fans, whereas girls who just dress up and tell silly headcanon stories aren’t, and that maybe, there’s an interesting reason for why this might be.
[bolded for emphasis]
This is interesting. Especially because an extrapolation from that is that the ‘orthodox’, ‘traditional’ mode of interacting with a work - knowing, staying close to the first interpretation, valuing the refusal to budge from those first interpretations over being inclusive and fluid - is therefore masculine-coded, but it’s feminine-coded to be canonically fluid, intensely metacritical, artistically motivated, and to encourage creative deconstruction and reconstruction.
Which is probably a sliver of the backlash that grows into the Fake Geek Girl conversation - that people think the ‘text’ of their fandom ‘faith’ shouldn’t be tampered with or recontextualized, whereas other people insist that it has to evolve to meet the needs of the people who it serves?
I’m not sure how it accommodates for works like Welcome to Night Vale (a really good place, I think to discuss fandoms and their interactions with media), where the literalism of its canon is the establishment that blanks are required to be filled in by the audience. Fan-created artwork of any type, arguably, is as valuable a ‘history’ of Night Vale as Cecil’s radio show, because so many details are up in the air anyway, and have to be informed by the information you do still have (e.g. nothing says Cecil can’t be a blob, so what would it mean if he were a blob?).
This is absolutely fascinating to me now, and will surely make up a large part of actual notes I have about what I can now call ‘exegetical fandom theory’ and how people interact with and alter media.
Reblogging for commentary, and because the divide between literalism/exegesis is another fascinating lens through which to examine both fandom generally, and its gender dynamics.
Freaking READ THIS.
I am afraid my commentary cannot possibly match the excellence above, but I have to add, extensive knowledge of canon is required for transformative works. It’s not that non-acquisitive fans don’t know their stuff, which is a pretty common accusation (having to “back up” their creations with source material). It’s that acquisitive fans (or a subset of them) sometimes don’t seem to understand the urge to take “fact”/canon and expand upon it.
It has often seemed to me like some sort of context: who can take everything the most literally, and least critically?
This is why stars and creators who embrace fan creations fill me with such joy. These are people who understands that when the work is done, it belongs to the fans. Not in a mean financial sense, but in an overarching becoming part of their lives sense. I think some people have a hard time understanding the importance of that. I think some particularly difficult people know that some fans feel like they should be free to interact with the world on their own time and in their own freeform way, and they do not respect it at all. I used to be one of them.
Thankfully, I pulled my head out of my ass.
it doesn’t matter how many “pretend to be dating” fics i read, i’m always fucking in it headfirst every time and i fall for that shit every time. i know the pattern i know the plot twists i know what’s gonna happen but every single fucking time i’m fucking on the edge of my seat wide-eyed whispering like “what’s gonna happen are they gonna fall in love” to myself like of course they are you fucking idiot this happens EVERY TIME but as soon as i see the description and it’s like “x person and x person pretend to do the dating” it’s eternal sunshine of the stupidest fucking mind over here
@DrGotts: My shot of glorious Tom Hiddleston @twhiddleston for @FollowWestwood & @climate_rev, with @Greenpeace #SaveTheArctic http://t.co/IznxrbsJV3
this scene really got me. I think it’s a perfect example of people’s views on abortions.
For 75 years 1000+ children have been sent into the arena to fight for survival for the enjoyment of the richest people. Then along with that there are a million+ children across the other districts living in abstract poverty. All of them too, fighting for survival. The chance for them to move up in the world is virtually impossible because they don’t have the tools to do so and the people above them have kept them down as much as possible.
However the idea that a foetus, a blob of cells, is at risk and suddenly they stand up and protest.
Too much value is placed on the unborn, and not enough on those already alive.
SOMEONE FINALLY SAID THE THING *THANK YOU*