such_heights: amy and rory looking at a pile of post (mcu: natasha [plane])
Everyone's reactions to Age of Ultron are pretty much the epitome of 'mileage varies', not to mention that we all watch different things and take away different things. That's great, and I don't want to tell anyone that their opinions are wrong, but I do find myself in disagreement with many of them. See, I loved Natasha's arc in Age of Ultron, and here's why.

running with it )
such_heights: amy and rory looking at a pile of post (mcu: natasha & pepper)
[personal profile] pocky_slash asked: What characteristics do you see recurring in characters you like? Why do those parts of the characters appeal to you?

I think most of my favourite characters fall into a few categories. They are mostly gender specific? I think I do like most of them for characters of any gender, apart from the first one. Men who are bad at feelings = super boring, usually.

1. Women who are bad at feelings. (Seven of Nine, Kalinda Sharma, Cara Mason, Amy Pond, etc.)

I am so so easy for women who are terrible at dealing with emotions. They pretend they don't have any, they push away the people they love best, they're sarcastic in the face of feelings, it's the best. It's especially great when they have a whole arc about learning to love again, in a way that isn't about taking away who they are. Seven and Cara are both great for this, particularly when it's other women helping them work through their childhood conditioning and get in touch with their softer sides occasionally. :D :D :D

I'm a sucker for stoic women too, like Firefly's Zoe or Olivia Dunham or Sarah Connor, but stoicism can be perfectly emotionally healthy - give me a female character who can't recognise, cope with or express all of the very deep secret emotions she's feeling and I'm allll yours, it's the greatest. How do humans?! How do relationships?! Kalinda doesn't do feelings she's just going to stare at Alicia soulfully whenever she's not looking. Amy can't actually have a reasonable conversation with her fiancé so she's just going to punch him in the arm until he stops looking so sad. THE BEST.

2. Men who are quiet heroes. (Neville Longbottom, Rory Pond, Steve Rogers, Aang, etc.)

I am sucker for male characters who are real lowercase nice guys. They usually have jobs/interests that aren't the most typically masculine (gardening/nursing/art) and don't have egos to speak of. They're not threatened by the powerful women in their lives and have a quiet sense of duty to help make the world better even if they aren't the most obvious candidate. The kind of characters that make me want to type their names in elongated allcaps a lot.

3. Competent women (Martha Jones, Joan Watson, Pepper Potts, Leslie Knope, etc.)

Give me a woman in a power suit, one who is really really good at her job or other calling, and I am all yours. Watching female characters be good at their jobs and respected in their field is just a joy. Also my lifespiration to be honest.

4. Kind characters. (Guinevere, Kaylee Frye, Tara Maclay, etc.)

It's mostly female characters that spring to mind when I think of my favourite sweet, kind characters, but I love this one pretty universally. These are often characters who are a little naive, at least at first, but not stupid, are often the moral centre of their group, and who bring joy and happiness to everyone's hearts, especially me. <3
such_heights: amy pond looking pleased with herself (who: amy [smug])
So here's my theory about episode 5. No spoilers beyond casting changes, and no speculation about plot, just character arcs.

you've waited long enough )
such_heights: amy and rory looking at a pile of post (stock: reach out and touch)
Sign-ups are open for [livejournal.com profile] rs_small_gifts until October 30th! The one fest that keeps dragging me back to HP.

But folks, can we quickly chat about exchange requests and boundary policing? I know, because I used to do it myself, that it's frequently standard fandom practice to put in a list of kinks that you don't like - 'the usual squicks like scat, bloodplay, watersports', 'none of that icky body fluid stuff' - etc etc.

Let's talk about a couple of the reasons why that's a problem:

1. It relies on a ridiculous premise, namely that there are all these kinky types waiting in the wings to spring on your request and write you watersports fic unless you specifically state otherwise. People want to write things that you'll like! Therefore, they are likely to work based on the things you've listed that you like, rather than assuming that anything you haven't specifically listed in your request is fair game.

Trying to make a complete list of things you dislike would be absurd, we'd be here all week. Keep it simple, specific, and mostly based on things that people genuinely might think to write for you unless you mention it, and it's all be fine. For instance, I've mentioned 'drunkenness' as a thing in my sign-up because it's a common story device in Remus/Sirius fic and one I don't personally like. Giving a long list of kinks you don't like, using derogatory language, being vague (what do you mean by 'the usual squicks' or 'kink' anyway?) or naming rare-in-fandom kinks is unnecessary and unhelpful.

2. And the reason that the above is a particular problem is because the continuous reinforcement of certain kinks as 'gross', 'icky', 'weird' etc is a method of boundary policing and holding up some pretty crappy fandom norms. It shames people who might otherwise want to request and write those things, and it shames people for whom whatever kink in question isn't just a fictional like but a real life practice or interest. By participating in that kind of behaviour you contribute to a culture in which some things are acceptable and others are not, and really we could all do without that.
such_heights: amy and rory looking at a pile of post (tw: gwen [fucks shit up | paperthinxfgx])
Today, half of my flist is full of discussion on warnings and triggers. And some of the comments from the anti-warnings side are really making my head spin.

headers, warnings, triggers and codes of fan culture: links to material that readers may find triggering )
such_heights: amy and rory looking at a pile of post (merlin: gwen)
[livejournal.com profile] beccaelizabeth started this current meta trend off with statistics on Torchwood - out of the speaking characters, how many are female, how many non-white characters are there, and does it pass the Bechdel test (women talking to each other about something other than a man)? [livejournal.com profile] dsudis crunched numbers for the first season of Stargate SG-1. [livejournal.com profile] lefaym also did a post last year on Doctor Who and the Bechdel Test. (If anyone knows of other, similar sets of stats out there, I'd love to see them!)

So, I decided to run the numbers for Merlin.

A couple of notes - this is looking at speaking characters only, and though I've tried to be objective as possible it's possible I've overlooked things, misjudged things, or that there are simply two valid cases to be made. (Especially with regard to the Bechdel Test, because I really wanted 'The Moment of Truth' to pass, for instance, but I don't think it does.)

cut for table, statistics etc )
such_heights: amy and rory looking at a pile of post (dw: girls ot3)
Now I've got them more sorted out, notes on the vid I posted earlier, both the vid itself and the themes behind it.

Vid Notes )

Now, onto more general thoughts that will hopefully be of interest even if you're not a vid watcher.

These Women And Their Stories )

Profile

such_heights: amy and rory looking at a pile of post (Default)
Amy

June 2017

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25 2627282930 

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 22nd, 2017 04:50 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios