The Mary Sue

[Chaos Theorist]

What is best in life?

A cold can of cola and some Red Hot Monster Munch

 

[Emperor Julian]

A cold can of cola and some Red Hot Monster Munch

Heresy

 

[CWCissey]

Heresy

Speaking of, when is Monster Munch: The Movie coming?

 

[Hummingbird]

Give them a bunch of trans and gays and people are still not satisfied.

 

[Sinner's Sandwich]

Glaad is NEVER satisfied

 

[Meowthkip]

Glaad is NEVER satisfied

We've come a long way from them praising Mission Hill for Gus and Wally.

 

[Munchingonfish]

Give them a bunch of trans and gays and people are still not satisfied.

278 regular and recurring characters seems like a lot. How many regular and recurring characters are there on TV? How does the population of the alphabet club on TV compare to the population of the alphabet club in real life? Given that stat is conveniently missing, I'm going to guess that it's probably higher than reality.

Troons make up less than 1 percent of the population and KF has shown, putting them on a pedestal only encourages more people to troon out for attention. Why do you want more than 16% of the country to personally know one? So they can attend one extra premature funeral?

 

[link1234]

Give them a bunch of trans and gays and people are still not satisfied.

But those 278 characters are still subjected to the same long-standing, damaging tropes.
To start, the “bury your gays” trope (killing off LGBTQ characters) is still going strong. Over the last two years, 62 gay and bi women television characters were killed off of their shows.

I remember a similar outrage last year. Just the fact you can find this many gay and bi characters on TV shows how much progress has been made but no because some of them will get killed off. How many straight people are killed off on TV? This is a perfect example of you get what you want (more gays on TV) and yet you are still unhappy (gays get same treatment including bad things).

re Bury Your Gays trope: "A lot of kids are seeing themselves getting killed… that can do damage."

This shit right here is why this idea of representation is dumb. They cant see these characters as people who are gay but rather "that is you". Just because a character has blue eyes does not mean that the character is a stand in for all blue eye people everywhere. It also means that a blue eyed character being killed is an attack on blue eyed people.

says TV basically teaches bi kids they need to fit into a "hyper-villainized, sex machine" mold.

?

“The more that we develop these characters, the more that these kids can see
themselves.”

What happened to not let TV raise your kids?

Glaad wants a day when a trans character is a lead role and NOT all about being trans.

Something tells me that these people would still make it about it.

glaad to TV writers: Make LGBTQ characters who1) don't die 2) aren't ensemble 3) aren't stereotypical leads.

Well this website is called The Mary Sue.

 

[Terrorist]

How does the population of the alphabet club on TV compare to the population of the alphabet club in real life?...Why do you want more than 16% of the country to personally know one? So they can attend one extra premature funeral?

It's a marketing strategy. They want to make troons seem more prevalent than they actually are to normalize them so more insecure young men/women with gender issues will troon out, and more of their friends/families will accept it. ONE OF US ROBBLE ROBBLE is the primary motivation there, not equality or authenticity or whatever.

Glaad is NEVER satisfied

Of course they aren't, there are still negholes to be pozzed. These people won't stop until everyone is a nonbinary mulatto graphic designer who thinks in tumblrspeak.

 

[Hummingbird]

It's a marketing strategy. They want to make troons seem more prevalent than they actually are to normalize them so more insecure young men/women with gender issues will troon out, and more of their friends/families will accept it. ONE OF US ROBBLE ROBBLE is the primary motivation there, not equality or authenticity or whatever..

Reminds me of this video.

 

[Hummingbird]

While there was another article about the "male gaze" and dismantling masculinity, I decided to do a test by asking if the gay male gaze is just as bad. One person said yes and another person had this response...

"The Male Gaze" doesn't just mean "the gaze of male people". It refers to a perspective that ASSUMES a particular audience -- in gender terms a straight cis masculine-presenting man etc etc. The whole point of Male Gaze is that it IS reductive and ignores the perspectives of gay men.

In corollary, the long-term counter to the male gaze isn't to promote a hypothetical "female gaze" that sexualizes men, because that would be similarly reductive, ignoring the experiences of lesbian women, asexual women, etc. The long term counter is to recognize the vast breadth of human experience rather than defaulting to Hegemonic Male.

(And of course, part of that is to create space for a polyphony, a plurality of voices. And in that is entangled the necessity of ensuring that all people have adequate access to the basics of life, so that they may all have equal opportunity to look up beyond the scrabble for basics...)

 

[Meowthkip]

While there was another article about the "male gaze" and dismantling masculinity, I decided to do a test by asking if the gay male gaze is just as bad. One person said yes and another person had this response...

Just let us stare at some titties and crotches, Jesus.

 

[invalid]

While there was another article about the "male gaze" and dismantling masculinity, I decided to do a test by asking if the gay male gaze is just as bad. One person said yes and another person had this response...

I thought there already was a female gaze, it's just that 99% of the time no one throws a shitfit about it.

 

[Ruin]

I thought there already was a female gaze, it's just that 99% of the time no one throws a shitfit about it.

View attachment 259927

The excuse I've heard from allegedly feminist types is that objectification is a form of power and womyn being powerless in society cannot objectify men because they hold power.

 

[Positron]

This "gaze" thing is sheer postmodern retardation. Yeah because we ascribe meanings to things we perceive, we inadvertently misrepresent the light rays that falls into our eyes. And yeah we deliberately choose to look at things that have special meaning to us, especially those that please us. And because we are not psychics like Chris, what we can ever see in a person is necessarily partial. We are never able to connect with someone's innermost thoughts, to see a person as they "truly are", "as a person". What is so wrong about having a "gaze"?

"The Male Gaze" doesn't just mean "the gaze of male people". It refers to a perspective that ASSUMES a particular audience -- in gender terms a straight cis masculine-presenting man etc etc. The whole point of Male Gaze is that it IS reductive and ignores the perspectives of gay men.

When you discover that a certain product ASSUMES a particular audience, you should take this as a hint that because you are not the ASSUMED audience, your criticism is going to miss the point at best, and worthless at worst.

 

[Pina Colada]

The way TMS and radfems put it feels more like navel-gazing to me.

 

[Ruin]

What is so wrong about having a "gaze"?

I'm probably going to be crucified for this and yea it's my opinion and not a fact but every radfem I've known has been significantly below average in the looks department. To me it feels like they're attempting to shame men for finding people other than them attractive out of jealousy similar to what incels and transtrenders do.

 

[invalid]

The excuse I've heard from allegedly feminist types is that objectification is a form of power and womyn being powerless in society cannot objectify men because they hold power.

Objectification happens in the mind, so unless they are scared Men have psychic powers, they are powerless to stop you objectifying them. Freaking idiots.

I'm probably going to be crucified for this and yea it's my opinion and not a fact but every radfem I've known has been significantly below average in the looks department. To me it feels like they're attempting to shame men for finding people other than them attractive out of jealousy similar to what incels and transtrenders do.

I think you are partly right, but it's also partly bad self-image and bad self confidence. The more far into rad-fem town they are the worse they value themselves, they often have a distorted view of their own attractiveness. This comes from talking to SJW's and Rad-fem types about their upbringing and self worth. Because I'm sure as fuck not gonna ask them about Feminism. And there are attractive Feminists, 9 times out of 10 though, they hate themselves.

 

[Meowthkip]

The excuse I've heard from allegedly feminist types is that objectification is a form of power and womyn being powerless in society cannot objectify men because they hold power.

If they want to feel power they should just get a shitton of money. Or lots of guns.

Or grab a dude's nuts and twist.

 

[Hummingbird]

Now that the Charlottesville riot hit, TMS has become totally obsessed with "Nazis", feminist talking points and far right rhetoric. I checked and there's hardly any geek stuff anymore (especially stuff that isn't related to social justice).