It’s 2014 and people are still trying to take Teen Wolf’s ‘timeline’ seriously…
y’all try to find the tiniest reason to not support sj/feminism like “oh wow a troll blog once said eating chinese food is cultural appropriation haha sorry i guess i don’t support trans rights at all anymore”
Okay, Tumblr, let’s make this go viral. You all know that representation in the media is desperately needed, and this game is delivering what many of the big-name games haven’t. Pumpkin Online is made by a development team headed by an African-American woman and they’re aiming to make this game as inclusive and friendly as possible. This is a farming/romance sim mixed up with an adventure MMORPG and made incredibly diverse.
You want to play a non-binary character? You got it! You want a range of races in your NPC neighbors? Done! Clothing choices and body features not restricted by gender? It’s in there! Relationships in no way affected by gender or lack of gender? Yes, that too!
Let’s get this thing going viral and help promote the Kickstarter (link in the article) so that everyone gets the chance to play the character they want to play. Reblog buttons, do your thing!
YOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO YOU GUYYYYSSSSSSSSSSSS
reblogging this again with a link to their Kickstarter here
I WANT THIS SO MUCH
This looks pretty cool:
#I just love how as soon as hardison smushes his face with eliot’s face#eliot immediately jerks away and looks to parker for help#like ‘he’s your boyfriend do something’#and parker just rolls her eyes#like ‘no way when he gets all cuddly in public he’s your boyfriend’#and you know that if eliot the hitter really wanted hardison to let go he could incapacitate him in a heartbeat#ugh#perf leverage ot3 (via secondbestpolicy)
a comment has popped up on nicole’s recent thread about fan demographics and representation, that is simply so ludicrous i am compelled to go back, like that post is the island from lost. essentially, the argument is: “spn is a work of fiction!!! it doesn’t belong to you and it’s not for you!!! fiction is a statement by an artist and by asking for representation you are policing art!!!”
a.) yo are you serious
b.) wow you are ok let’s do this
c.) the use of the word “policing” here (a term i pulled directly from the comment) is hilariously inappropriate. it is very difficult- if not impossible- for members of a powerless group to “police” members of an empowered group. there can be no enforcement, no oversight or regulation, which is central to the notion of policing. meaning, a bunch of fans calling for representation on their own personal blogs and social media accounts is in no way exercising any actual authority over the spn cast, crew, or creative team.
(sort of ironically, trying to get younger (or newer but not-so-young, heyo) fans to shut up about representation or to leave fandom entirely is a work of policing- because established fans with large followings telling smaller voices to sit at the kid’s table or get out is policing incarnate, an exercise in relative force. fandoms cannot police their shows, but holy hell do they like to police themselves, sometimes for good and sometimes for… the other thing.)
d.) the idea that spn collectively comprises a coherent “artist’s statement” is somewhat misleading. spn is a television show airing on a commercial network, for over nine years: its duration separates it from other types of creative works like novels, prints, or even performances. we are not talking about the single coherent artistic vision of one poet or even an independent collective of video artists: we are talking about a team of hundreds of professionals ranging from actors to camera operators to costume designers to producers and execs to craft services to screenwriters. hundreds of people working on a project which is packaged and sold to a commercial network, and supported by advertising dollars.
(note: i think television is a highly creative and artistic medium and i believe it’s worthy of study and critical analysis. don’t get angry with me about “but television is too art!!!!” because i obviously agree. i am saying there’s a degree to which television as a medium is highly impacted by advertising and the pressures of corporate studios, as well as a huge collective process. is art impacted by corporate bullshit? long deep sigh, yeah, but let’s talk about that later. undoubtedly, spn is art. but its role as a tv program makes things more complicated.)
e.) the makers of supernatural have repeatedly acknowledged the major role that fans play in both keeping the show on the air, and in (indirectly) influencing the show’s output. according to them, the fan response to castiel influenced the decision to keep him on. according to them, negative fan attitudes towards jo and bela influenced the decision for those characters to be pushed out. however true (or untrue) those things are, the showrunners still make those claims. (and either way let’s get real: older fans were actively calling for changes to the show a longass time before any newer fans wandered in and started wondering why the angels aren’t genderqueer. fans communicating their desires to media producers is about as recent a phenomenon as the wheel or portable fire, and we all do it, not just one side or the other.) in other words, while the audience cannot “police” a show, shows like spn do rely on their audience. as good a show as i think spn can be, there’s no fucking way it would have stayed on the air for a decade without the passionate devotion of its fanbase. a fanbase that is now saying, “hey, you can do better.”
f.) with allllllll that in mind, let’s address the poisonous central argument: that art is above criticism, or that criticism of art makes us art’s oppressors. i mean, right off, if that’s true, there are gonna be a lot of unhappy people at the new york times. it’s obviously, and importantly, not true. art is not above criticism. and, vitally, criticism of art is not the same thing as repression of art.
art is a human activity: some people would argue it is in fact what makes us human. and for all our nobility and wonder humans are imperfect things. we hate and fear and fight and lie. sometimes our art lies, too: it can create fear or hatred. do i have to remind anyone that there are racist novels? sexist song lyrics? offensive, stereotyped caricatures in comics and illustration? do i have to haul out specific examples to prove this point? i am in no way making comparison between spn- a fairly innocuous broadcast show about some dudes- to any of the truly egregiously offensive works of history. i am not, so let’s not get into a fight about it. i am simply illustrating that the incredible idea that art is above criticism- that we must in no way ever point out harmful content, or else we become that art’s oppressors- is ludicrous, unfair, and untrue. it holds us back. it makes us afraid to rock the boat, because who wants to fucking oppress art? nobody with a soul wants to find themselves in that position. but we are not oppressing art or artists. we are calling out for a better way. we are asking for those in positions of creative power to create responsibly.
in fact, let’s talk about art for a second. let’s talk about the recent jeff koons retrospective at the whitney in nyc, an enormously publicized exhibition of a highly collected contemporary artist. jeff koons is a fucking millionaire whose work is routinely purchased by millionaires. when critic ben davis rightly- and powerfully- uncovered the problematic racial underpinnings of koons’ work, and exposed the whitney’s unquestioning repetition of those problematic dynamics, are you seriously gonna tell me that ben davis was somehow policing or oppressing jeff koons? because if you think that i have a honking clown sound effect that i’m gonna play whenever you enter a room.
g.) must i summarize? okay, here it is. a bunch of fans asking for increased representation and less problematic speech (less slurs, less objectification) is not equivalent to policing on one hand, nor to “whining” on the other. it is fair criticism of a piece of media, a work of art. what makes it so amazing, so important, is that it’s done from love. fans who love this show are asking it to treat them better. to offer them some recognition and acceptance, in return for the loyalty and energy and enthusiasm that they have paid this show for years. do the makers of spn “owe” us anything? no, and also yes, and also maybe. the original comment says that we are owed nothing, that we deserve nothing, because the show “doesn’t belong” to the fans, only the creators. do shows belong entirely to the people who make them? legally, sure. but isn’t there a tiny bit of any creative endeavor that lives only in the eyes and hearts of its audience? isn’t that why television shows are made? isn’t that how they endure?
so, can we change the minds of the powers that be? i don’t know. all i know for sure is, we have a right to speak ours. silencing these conversations does not make us, our fan community, or the show, better. it does not make us more “grown up” to resign ourselves to the idea that what we’ve got now is all we’re ever gonna get, or all that is possible.
Stydia AU - After he left town for the summer, Stiles and Lydia stopped talking. When he comes back with a new girlfriend, Lydia starts to think maybe she should’ve called..
People Art Gallery
Exciting Photo Illusions
The swimming pool temporarily effed me up..