I’ve discovered that one of the leads on Undercovers – Gugu Mbatha-Raw – played Tish Jones on Doctor Who. I totally didn’t recognise her! This actually makes me much more excited for Undercovers because even though Tish’s role was small I have this strange deep affection for her.
The You Tube version of Lady Gaga’s ‘Monster’ I have bookmarked right now shows a background with a naked girl sitting in profile, with her long dark hair hanging loose around her and obscuring her face, while a crow sitting on her head mid take off. The girl also has this large tattoo on her lower back/side but you can’t really see any details. Anyway – it just really reminded me of The Vampire Diaries. The girl could be Elena (or Katherine but I always think Elena first because I love her) and then there’s Damon’s crow. It makes me want to make up stories about what the hell could be going on.
Apparently Elizabeth Moon was showing her ass (this makes me sad because I really like her books). Jim Hines wrote an open letter to her
here. I’ve mainly been avoiding it all. But I did read some of Elizabeth’s comments and it inspired this little rant:
I’ve seen a lot the idea that ‘we’ (ie: westerners) are so tolerant and forgiving of Muslims and that Muslims aren’t anywhere as tolerant/forgiving and people using that somehow as an excuse for not being more accepting, for not fighting harder against bigotry and racism.
Because we’re apparently 'better' then them (and our behaviour towards them is better then how they behave towards us so why should we bother to be any better than we currently are?). I feel like there is a lot of smugness and self-righteousness here. And it’s a part of the whole ‘we’re civilised/they’re savages’ point of view.
I am having serious problems understanding what kind of logic is in that line of thinking? How can people not see how ridiculous that is? How childish? It’s one kid saying ‘well, this other person isn’t as nice to me as I have been to them so why do I still have to be polite or even nicer to them?’ First of all, it’s not about the other person/Muslims/whoever it’s about
you. You’re not tolerant or understanding or polite or compassionate towards others based on how they behave towards you, or how you think they would be towards you, you behave that way because that’s the right way to behave! How do people not understand this? Someone else being a horrible person does not excuse you being a horrible person. Other people being racist or bigots doesn’t somehow absolve you of being the same. Here’s a suggestion: be a good person because that’s the right thing to do.
John Scalzi did a post here on how recent sci-fi movies stack up on with the Bechdel Test (very poorly as it happens) and the comments... there were actually a bunch of not bad ones (and weirdly a lot of posts via Twitter which I haven’t come across before) but I really should know better than to read them because then you get the bad ones, the ones that make me despair for humanity and want to smack people upside the head. Like this three person exchange near the top:
“I'm not entirely sure SF is sexists. SF is about exploration and dramatic butt kicking. Women for the most part, are not into exploration, leadership and conquering new alien planets. SO in that respect I don't wonder if it's just merely accurate?” and
“My beef with movies like Avatar is that the women in them are so masculine. They are hunting, spitting, cussing, smoking "men." We don't see anything nurturing or about the Na’vi.” (Ayla) I can’t even.... *hands* OMG. I just find this so horrifying. Why do people think like this? Why?!
Then you get a good comment from (kersy), and this part I liked best:
“Women are more than just baby makers. More than nice hair and "nurturing" children and the home domain. We are leaders and scientist and warriors too. Instead of wiping us off the sci-fi map, we need to be shown as the multi-faceted people we are.” She also had a nice comment about how multi-faceted Ellen Ripley was as a character.
But then she gets a comment from Jon Runyan:
“I think you missed Ayla’s point. She’s not saying woman CANT be multi-faceted people (leaders, scientists, and warriors is your example), it’s simply that woman, by a large percentage, are NOT those things. And they should get some dialogue outside of classic man endeavours.” Oh, fuck you.
Kersy made another excellent comment a little further down when (Jeff) stated:
At first I was happy about sitting between two attractive women, but once they started talking to each other I realized how boring female dialog can be to men. I had to change seats after about five minutes because I couldn't stand it anymore. That's when I realized why so many films fail the Bechdel Test. It takes writing talent to construct believable dialog between female characters that doesn't put men to sleep. Kersy’s excellent response:
“You comment highlights exactly where the problem stems from - the idea that men, their audience and conversation and interests, are default. The women you sat between are not there to entertain you and your interests does not represent the interests of all human beings. Immediately declaring their conversation worthless because it did not entertain you is the height of self centered-ness.” I wish I could be so eloquent, but instead: YES, exactly. Thank you!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
