Live and breathe comics. Spit lead and bleed ink.
Reblogged from sonnetscrewdriver :
Asked by Anonymous:
On the off chance that it was some other anon whom you blocked: it's such a common thing for female characters to be dismissed on criteria that would never be applied to to a male character, to have their achievements and worth belittled... after everything Amy did, all the choices she made, the people she saved, I don't see how an argument can possibly be made that she is without agency that isn't based on or distorted by sexist assumptions/premises/preconceptions.
I don’t give a flying fucking fucky fuck if you think Amy Pond is a presh queen of agency and female empowerment. Good for friggin’ you, I don’t fucking care about what you think about Amy Pond and whatever fucking made up universal-plug-in-understanding formula you have for coming to the conclusion that I’m sexist for disliking her.
You’re not me.
Ya got that? You are not me so the fact you think you can understand who I am and why I think how I do about Amy simply because YOU believe there is some magical fucking standard of media engagement with Moffat’s Doctor Who; because YOU think agency is doing literal stuff in a story and not something that exists on a metaphorical level pertaining to a writer’s use, motivation, and expression of a fictional female character as representation of the relevance, treatment, and understandings of real women; and YOU fail to understand that an audience brings their personal ideals, emotions, histories, and personalities into the space presented to them is the saddest goddman thing in your life right now. It is so sad. You are a sad person. A sad sad sad person. Like, srsly, super sad.
NOW! Before we go further and your next card is “You’re unreasonably angry and hostile and thus your arguments are invalid” - just know your brothers sent me a bunch of those anon messages already so spare me.
Yeah I’m angry. I am angry at Moffat and this horrible thing he calls a female character and, now, I’m angry at you.
WEIRD how just because you approach me in a “civil” tone I am not obligated to respond back in kind, right? Who fucking knew maybe people don’t owe you nice words and respect when you come to their ask box claiming their views are sexist because those views happen to disagree with yours. Almost like a creepy dude on the bus who asks you where you’re going and you tell them to fuck off so they call you a bitch because they think they are entitled to your time and conversation. I don’t owe you jack fuck, but I will spare some of my time because I have real agency and choose to do so:
Since you need some kind of shopping list as to WHY I think like I do about Amy Pond so you can get some closure with your sad life and move focus onto another person who doesn’t view media how you view it, here we go then. Get your cowboy boots pathetic rodeo clown, lets go step by step through a moment in Amy Pond’s crappy life:
- Amy is reduced to her reproductive potential several times in the narrative - but admittedly you probably won’t see that because you are the one who
is actually sexist andthinks real women are presented well by a female character if the female character does the bare minimum of just saying things and doing things.
- Well, what exactly did Amy being pregnant do?
- Get your mind out of the plot, you’re thinking like me now! Pluck your brain out of that torrid mess that is Moffat Who and look at not simply the plot-point-purpose of Amy NOT experiencing pregnancy and being all too unaware of it but instead try looking at this plot-point from the perspective of “what was the writer expressing about real women by turning Amy’s pregnancy into a horrifying plot twist?”
- Well? What purpose did the horrorpreggo serve? To be scary, right? Pregnancy, especially as it was an unknown pregnancy, was written to be scary and shocking and a cliffhanger. Amy had, in the narrative, no idea she was pregnant or even what was going on when we had a scene of her looking down at her bulging tummy screaming.
- REMINDER! pregnancy is a real thing that can and does happen to plenty of women so let’s carry that real world understanding over into the narrative and apply it to our viewing! WOW!
- If agency is Amy doing things and making choices how the fuck can you watch a female character written in a narrative as NOT KNOWING she was pregnant and being written as NOT HAVING A SAY IN THE EVENTS and written as NOT BEING ABLE TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE SITUATION as super shiny gold star female character agency writing? How?!
- Because she was written into that situation anon - into a pregnancy = horror situation. A female character’s body is written as and displayed by the filming as being terrifying and ~mysterious~ and a plot-point to solve and be clever about! Oh weeeeeeeeeeee! Seriously how are you not insulted by the writer’s use of REAL PEOPLE’S BODIES being turned into scary mystery plots?
- To reiterate: Amy is a fictional woman whose everything is dictated by an almighty creator who decided to utilize a particular defining aspect of some women’s womanhood as something shocking and creepy and that offends me because, to me, that reads as the author being a gross asshole since he also wrote the pregnancy something the female character has kept from her, is something she unknowingly is going through, and is an experience two men need to find her and save her from.
- A female character represents how the author views real women; what does this purposeful use of typically female codified reproduction being presented as something the female was unaware of and being, basically, harvested for actually mean in the wider scope of the mind of the man writing this situation? Whatever the fuck it is it doesn’t concerned with the female character’s agency to me, what with her being in the dark, duped, and in need of finding and saving with her presented womanhood purposefully rendering her as the target for baddies, immobile, and a plot point void of being one the female character has had a hand in crafting. Shit is just happening to Amy Pond.
- That offends me because it makes a real world womanish element the center of helplessness, confusion, terror, and ultimately tragedy forwarding the main male character’s adventure. What is being written to happen to the female Amy is being done so the male Doctor can say things and do things. Amy doesn’t have agency, shit just happens to her because the Doctor needs to do something wacky and complicated.
What the hell makes you think I’m not balls to the wall critical of the male characters in Moffat era Who? Moffat is so piss poor at writing female characters but his men are just as insulting; The 11th Doctor is disgusting and sweet death ridden Rory is a nob. Quickie Example: The Doctor asks Rory if he can hug Amy instead of asking her herself and Rory “allows” it. I can’t believe you think Amy has agency flowing form her feisty fictional body even though the writer won’t let her fucking make her own decisions about her own body even over something so ridiculous as a hug.
Don’t even get me started on how the series hypes up the perfect loving Last Centurion story but WOOPSIE the female character is written to be wah waaaah infertile and she decides to leave the male character because HE wanted kids.
We end with the common definition of agency:
Agency is the ability for a person to act for herself or himself.
Funny thing is character’s don’t act for themselves, they act as the author craft them too - and what I see Moffat do to and then use his female characters for? You bet I think most of the time he is a misogynistic child.
Kristie nails some truth to some anonymous misogynist’s forehead
Kristie is My Doctor.
You guys do realize there’s a difference between agency and motivation, right?
Obviously you fucking don’t.
Motivation are the reason(s) someone does something; agency is someone deciding to do something for oneself. Motivation influences agency in real people. Fictional people however aren’t real people, I don’t know why this is so hard for you guys to grasp.
Amy is a fictional character written by a man to be pregnant. Amy as a character did not within the written narrative be allowed by the male author to know what was happening to her.
Amy didn’t have motivation given to her by Moffat to be pregnant or even given agency awareness of being pregnant. Amy literally was presented as suddenly pregnant to her fictional awareness; meaning as a character she was suddenly allowed self awareness by Moffat for the effect of shocking and spooking the audience.
So what motivation do you think you’re even talking about? What the cra-diddly-ap is your perceived explanation for Amy Pond’s “behavior”? Behavior isn’t motivation; motivation becomes behavior and pregnancy isn’t even a fucking behavior.
Amy Pond is not presented to be with child because it is something she as a character has been written to talk about wanting or planing or shown going through the process of pregnancy. Amy is presented as with child with a single jump cut. The only motivation was Moffat’s and my point is that that motivation is some stinky sexist shit.
just reblogging to add, that I thought the scene where the Doctor asks Rory if he can hug Amy was really funny. Amy can and will hug whoever the fuck she pleases, but in rory being asked all I saw was a mocking of Rory’s role in the relationship, the Doctor’s not ACTUALLY asking permission, he’s sorta saying “she’s gonna do it anyway, pretend you agree now because let’s face it, it’s gonna happen.” He’s allowing Rory, who is always mocked in terms of his role in their relationship to save a little face. At least to himself, which he knows, making it irrelevant and all the more mocking, which made it more amusing?
Am I seeing layers that aren’t there? I mean christ knows moffatt has his fair share of things to complain about, but there are some scenes that stand out to me as well done. Don’t get started on most of 11’s run though in general.
Christ, I KNOW I own like 10 of the fuckers, but why can I never find an SD card [or even micro sd] when I need one?
I swear, I own a fucking ton of them. And the minute I need them, they all mysteriously vanish. I’m blaming gremlins.
Reblogged from sonnetscrewdriver :
Okay, okay, I’m going to tell you what Hermione sees in Ron.
A trio is a balancing act, right? They’re equalizers of each other. Harry’s like the action, Hermione’s the brains, Ron’s the heart. Hermione has been assassinated in these movies, and I mean that genuinely—by giving her every single positive character trait that Ron has, they have assassinated her character in the movies. She’s been harmed by being made to be less human, because everything good Ron has, she’s been given.
So, for instance: “If you want to kill Harry, you’re going to have to kill me too”—RON, leg is broken, he’s in pain, gets up and stands in front of Harry and says this. Who gets that line in the movie? Hermione.
“Fear of a name increases the fear of the thing itself.” Hermione doesn’t say Voldemort’s name until well into the books—that’s Dumbledore’s line. When does Hermione say it in the movies? Beginning of Movie 2.
When the Devil’s Snare is curling itself around everybody, Hermione panics, and Ron is the one who keeps his head and says “Are you a witch or not?” In the movie, everybody else panics and Hermione keeps her head and does the biggest, brightest flare of sunlight spell there ever was.
So, Hermione—all her flaws were shaved away in the films. And that sounds like you’re making a kick-ass, amazing character, and what you’re doing is dehumanizing her. And it pisses me off. It really does.
In the books, they balance each other out, because where Hermione gets frazzled and maybe her rationality overtakes some of her instinct, Ron has that to back it up; Ron has a kind of emotional grounding that can keep Hermione’s hyper-rationalness in check. Sometimes Hermione’s super-logical nature grates Harry and bothers him, and isn’t the thing he needs even if it’s the right thing, like when she says “You have a saving people thing.” That is the thing that Harry needed to hear, she’s a hundred percent right, but the way she does it is wrong. That’s the classic “she’s super logical, she’s super brilliant, but she doesn’t know how to handle people emotionally,” at least Harry.
So in the books they are this balanced group, and in the movies, in the movies—hell, not even Harry is good enough for Hermione in the movies. No one’s good enough for Hermione in the movies—God isn’t good enough for Hermione in the movies! Hermione is everybody’s everything in the movies.
Harry’s idea to jump on the dragon in the books, who gets it in the movies? Hermione, who hates to fly. Hermione, who overcomes her withering fear of flying to take over Harry’s big idea to get out of the—like, why does Hermione get all these moments?
[John: Because we need to market the movie to girls.]
I think girls like the books, period. And like the Hermione in the books, and like the Hermione in the books just fine before Hollywood made her idealized and perfect. And if they would have trusted that, they would have been just fine.
Would the movies have been bad if she was as awesome as she was in the books, and as human as she was in the books? Would the movies get worse?
She IS a strong girl character. This is the thing that pisses me off. They are equating “strong” with superhuman. To me, the Hermione in the book is twelve times stronger than the completely unreachable ideal of Hermione in the movies. Give me the Hermione in the book who’s human and has flaws any single day of the week.
Here’s a classic example: When Snape in the first book yells at Hermione for being an insufferable know-it-all, do you want to know what Ron says in the book? “Well, you’re asking the questions, and she has to answer. Why ask if you don’t want to be told?” What does he say in the movie? “He’s got a point, you know.” Ron? Would never do that. Would NEVER do that, even before he liked Hermione. Ron would never do that."
Finally saw The World’s End. The scene where they guy who played John Cleese in Holy Flying Circus is whipped with a branch had me in fucking stitches. Such a brilliant but obscure joke, but one of the biggest laughs of the movie for me.
Theme by Lauren Ashpole