Welp

Oct. 27th, 2012 08:38 am
chocolatepot: Ed and Stede (Default)
Sorry to those of my friends who found weird, rambling comments in their inboxes this morning. Madderbrad has been banned from this journal and his comments have been screened because, frankly, nobody should have to look at them.

ETA: The drop-down addresses in my URL bar are all in white text for some reason. Happening to anyone else?
chocolatepot: Ed and Stede (Default)
On a scale of one to ten, how pissed off would you be if a guy referred to a woman/female character with three kids as a baby machine, then defended it by saying "Whether a sausage machine turns out three sausages or a million ... it's still a sausage machine. Particularly if it does nothing else but make sausages"?
chocolatepot: Ed and Stede (Default)
I bought the Humble Indie eBook Bundle! I hadn't been doing it for the games because I never played the ones I bought, but it seemed like a decent selection.

It's funny, I generally do nothing but view funny gifsets and occasionally post fashion history information on Tumblr, but today I got embroiled in a deep argument about Marie Antoinette and Sofia Coppola's intent and effect in not challenging the view that she liked spending money on fripperies/had an extramarital affair. (And it all stemmed from this Danish teenager's Tumblr for complaining about film costumes.) I think I had a pretty decent discussion and we ended well, but if you want to see something totally batshit, start here and read all her other posts on the matter. I don't think I need to explain why it's batshit, given that it starts off with A woman that takes on a lover will never not be a whore. Yeah. Yeah. I was going to paste some other choice bits, but it's all choice bits, so yeah.

Oh, okay, I'll give you one from a later post. Animals do the same thing?? WE ARE NOT ANIMALS, EVEN IF ANIMALS OFTEN BEHAVE BETTER. And promiscuity is a human trait you asshole. Animals are not promiscuous.
chocolatepot: Ed and Stede (Default)
Korra finale )

Man, is this dialogue (quadrologue?) going to go down once a week on 18cLife?
Person A: Do you think they used to X?
Person B: My grandmother used to Y, so probably.
Person C: That's not quite what we're talking about. There's no evidence of X or Y in the 18th century.
Person D: I really don't think Person B was saying they must have done Y in the 18th century!
It's enough to make me unsubscribe. I wonder what the list would be like if 18cWomen hadn't deleted mysteriously. I keep going back and forth on RevList - on the con side, it's all about military reenactment; on the pro, it was interesting to read the recent discussion on historic site rules, plus I get a kick out of watching Kelsey be argumentative as I sometimes feel like the only one.

Here is part of a book review with some stuff to think on re: "new ideas" in genre fiction and writing in general.

I'm not sure how to word myself properly but I think that while this Racialicious article is great, a) it strikes me that it's somewhat pointless to describe why specific shouted "compliments" are sexist because the act of shouting "compliments" at someone in a parking lot is itself something that ought to be eradicated; b) there is kind of a sex negative vibe to it, "trading one set of handcuffs for another," you know.
chocolatepot: Ed and Stede (Default)
It's interesting to read the comments to this NYT review of Mad Men, many of which say that they don't want to watch it because they lived it (and really I have no problem with people who don't want to watch something because the -isms portrayed bother them too much, but a lot of them seem to think the -isms are endorsed by the show and it's all about nostalgia for a ~better time~, which definitely makes me think they didn't even watch a preview of it on YouTube) - and then contrast them with the top comment on this interview, which (misuses the word "tokenism" and) says Mad Men is sexist for making the female characters tend to be better people. Also funny how so many commenters on the NYT review assert that it was a horrible time and they have no desire to relive it while the top commenter on the other is "curious why we’re convinced that men in the sixties were a bunch of objectifying bastards. As far as I can tell whenever I interact with a man who was in his ‘prime’ during the sixties… He’s usually horrified by the attitude of young men towards women today. I don’t think there ever was a time where this kind of boorish sexual behaviour by men was acceptable."

Unrelated, but Charity Wakefield is going to be in The Munsters reboot along with Eddie Izzard. I know nothing about the original show but I am now very interested in the reboot.

Read Catching Fire in 24 hrs. I had to order Mockingjay because it's out of nearly every library in the system, even the ones with twelve copies. I would have liked to get it on the Kindle Because I Can but there is an 18 person waiting list. Ten for Is Everyone Hanging Out Without Me? which I have had on order for WEEKS, even though there are several copies not checked out in the system, what is that? For a bit afterward I was reading an ebook of Diane Duane short stories I bought when she did that sale, but then I switched over to my scanned-PDF of The History of Miss Betsy Thoughtless, which is thoroughly 18th century. Published in 1751, written by Eliza Haywood - read the wiki entry, her books/life sound fantastic, she also wrote a satire of Pamela, I hope she showed up in that "Shakespeare's Sister" exhibition - it is supposed to be "the first novel of female development in English".

I got to do all of this reading because my shoulder has been in agony all day. I have no idea what I did to it but it was bad. Icing it didn't do much and aspirin only helped for a little bit. It's bad because I really really was going to sew a case for my Kindle, but otoh I did use the Kindle quite a bit.
chocolatepot: The TARDIS against a wall (Tardis)
You know, I was all psyched to watch this because I'd seen people talking about how "inappropriate" (read: involves sex) and trashy it was. And when it started out, I was so happy that there was an important character (Miss Harkness) who was a semi-retired courtesan/madam, and the show wasn't judgmental about her profession. I like period media that addresses issues like that, that goes "hey, the Victorian/Edwardian 'fallen women are either heartless or constantly bemoaning their fate' thing wasn't really universal, more of the kind of thing society wanted to be true."

But then she gets all sad because she may have money and nice clothes, but really she has ~nothing~. And Marcus's lover, Ruth, is rude and cold and doesn't like the Grand (= she's Not Good). And Monica, the maid Miss Harkness took under her wing and taught to be a lady (just to be a lady, although I thought at first she was going to make her a successful mistress) oh no slept with a man and was his mistress despite Miss Harkness saying it was a bad life! And then when he leaves her to go back to London, she decides to take up prostitution, so of course she gets beaten up and raped by three men. And then she kills one and goes to prison, because Such is the Downfall of the Soiled Dove.

God damn it, Russell T Davies. You suck and ruin everything. I'm really not a hardcore sex-positive feminist in the "sex workers are all empowered" vein, but a well-off and successful prostitute in 1920 could have a lot more independence than most other women. And instead he chose to go with a completely unoriginal, cliché, and frankly regressive storyline. And that's without going into how Marcus starts off a total ass but seems to be redeemed by the love of a good woman, which is not even a storyline I have a problem with, in general.

Profile

chocolatepot: Ed and Stede (Default)
Enchanted

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314 151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Style Credit

Syndicate

RSS Atom
Page generated Jun. 3rd, 2025 11:11 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Most Popular Tags