Rooney Mara, you are perfection to me.
Always see “real women” posts so here’s one for the dudes.
this says so much. I wish there were more posts like this. please.
body positivity and realistic body standards are important for guys too!
Men are constantly reassured that it’s okay to oogle women and harrass them about their looks. Women rarely see sexualized images of men that are made for women.
Guys get eye candy everywhere they go. Their sexual gaze is constantly catered to. Women, at least hetero women, are rarely given the opportunity to have their sexual interest entertained. We’re told that we should be okay with having nothing to look at. That our fantasies don’t matter. That we shouldn’t ever even remotely expect to be able to eyeball a svelte man in public, only behind closed doors and heaven forbid that the man look vulnerable. So we finally get to see images that turn us on and people are like, “Hey, you can’t put that in magazines! that might hurt some little boy’s feelings!”
Men are given alternative physical images to aspire to. Women are not.
While yes, guys should be treated to body positivity too… they already are. Just watch TV or any comedy and count the number of pudgy, out of shape, male leads vs pudgy, out of shape female leads. Or the number of hairy, overweight, older men making block buster movies vs the number of hairy, overweight, older women. Now count how many times that male character has some incredibly smart, sexy wife who does everything for him. And then how many times she’s the butt of the joke when he gets hot for some woman who’s younger and thinner than she is.
Fuck, just look at the responses to women not shaving their legs vs the responses to guys not shaving off their stubble.
Name six movies about a woman above the age of forty who’s love interest is a man that’s younger than she is where the plot doesn’t revolve around her being the butt of a cougar or mom joke. Now name me six where a man over the age of forty’s love interest is a woman who’s significantly younger than he is. Bonus points for action movies where anyone in the movie makes a mention of the age difference.
How many times are male politician or CEO’s body or style of dress put into question? How many times are female’s? Or has everyone forgotten how we flip out when the president’s wife gets a new hair cut? Or how Hillary Clinton had to have a FUCKING MAKE OVER before the news agencies took her seriously? How many times was her daughter raked over the coals for looking like an average teenager?
What’s more, I’ve never heard any of my female friends or my mother and her female friends saying, “Why can’t my 50 year old husband get a six pack like that?” What I USUALLY here is “I wish my husband would get a nice hair cut.” or “I wish he’d wear some nicer clothes that actually fit him.”
But what i hear overhear men saying all time is, “No fat chicks!” or “I wish my wife had bigger boobs.”
I know a woman who’s husband threatened to leave her if she didn’t get a face lift and a boob job- she was so upset that she did it. She felt disgusting every day because she wasn’t a size six and he expected her to be a size six after bearing him four kids. My own uncle said if his wife got overweight that he’d drag her behind a car until she lost weight. These aren’t even “bad guys”! They seem like perfectly nice men when you meet them! But they’re taught from the moment they’re kids that all women need to be a certain body type to be worthy of any attention.
Men are told through our culture’s stories and media that a woman will still love them unconditionally and throw themselves at them if they’re fat, old, balding, or an asshole, while women are told that if they’re pushy, fat, old or wearing out of style clothes that they aren’t even worth mentioning.
I was just going to bold the good parts , so I bolded the whole thing lol.
Just to add to the bolded commentary, men control our culture’s stories and media. Men control the advertising, film, and television industries. The images of men which men say are unrealistic and bad are produced and cultivated by men. They are the fulfillment of MALE fantasies, not the fantasies of women.
Carrion Crow, Colored Pencil
There are more women in this screenshot than there are in the entire reboot
This scene right here in many ways encapsulates many of the frustrations I have with the Star Trek reboot, and most reboots in general. When you reboot a “groundbreaking” show, you should reboot the ideals of the show and the mission of the franchise, not just play on the nostalgia of old fans. Star Trek in the 60s comes in the middle of the Cold War and in the midst of the Civil Rights Era, so including different nationalities, a female black lieutenant, and an alien was a huge deal. Now? The same characters look dated in a reboot because Star Trek completed its original mission. Moreover, the reboot movies just don’t make any sense.
Too often, Star Trek traditionalists rage over J. J. Abrams “destroying” Star Trek by rewriting its history. That isn’t my biggest issue. Gene Roddenberry himself said that one day Star Trek would continue without him for a new generation and he would be okay with that, because he believed Star Trek belonged to the people. My issue is not a reboot itself, nor is it a fresh timeline. My problem is that this reboot makes Star Trek look so out of touch. The Cold War is over. The Civil Rights Movement has passed, and we have Star Trek as a reference piece of culture now. It’s time to “boldly go where no one has gone before” again.
It starts with the crew. The original Enterprise crew are heroes for sure, but their time has passed. They are the people we look back to for guidance now. Since Kirk, we’ve had a much more diplomatic and reserved captain in Picard, a more spiritual and combat-ready captain in Sisko (who also happened to be black and from New Orleans woot!), and we had probably our toughest captain ever in a woman with Captain Janeway. We’ve seen people of color and women take on larger roles within the shows for decades, so why must we now go back to play on nostalgia from the 60s. I would have hoped to see a more gender-balanced crew, and with all of the tensions in American politics between the US and the Islamic world, I think it would have been a Star Trek move to include a Muslim character on the crew just like the original Enterprise had a Russian flying the ship. Americans continue to debate whether gay people should be able to live their lives, so I think it would be a Star Trek move to have a gay character featured and have them be as competent and professional as Uhura and Chekov. Hell, we’ve represented various groups in Harry Kim, Nyota Uhura, Julian Bashir Chakotay, Chekov, Scotty, Sulu, O’Brien, Travis Mayweather, Hoshi Sato, and more. We’ve touched briefly on genderqueerness with Dax. Star Trek has gone there before. Why not go there again? In “playing it safe,” they’ve made Star Trek look dull and out of touch.
Next we have the plotlines themselves. Kirk and Spock’s friendship is legendary, obviously, but that friendship built over three seasons of television, and five movies, all of which hit the screen over the course of thirty years. What has boggled me by the last two Star Trek movies is the overwhelming focus on Kirk and Spock to the detriment of everything else going on. The last two movies have had the same arc: Kirk needs to learn to cool his jets, and Spock needs to learn that it’s okay to have feelings sometimes. Why? We already covered that. You established a crew, now go do something. I could pick apart the plot of Into Darkness for about four paragraphs here, but most of it comes down to too many references to Wrath of Kahn and other Star Trek media without any context to make it blend into a cohesive story. Fandom inside jokes can be great for a franchise so long as they don’t compromise the story for the uninitiated. If a good portion of your audience has no idea why we’re tossing around names and places, they’re not going to care and disconnect from the movie.
All of this leaves Star Trek as something uninspiring, and to be fair I think we’ve been here for a long time. Star Trek has always been a cult show, but we’ve been trapped in a movie franchise that you are only invested in because your parent(s) raised you on Star Trek since Star Trek: First Contact. Star Trek has just been a series of action movies set in space since the Picard movie era, and it has never pulled itself out of it. I want my competence Star Trek back. I want to see people from all sorts of backgrounds coming together to do their jobs as they explore new frontiers. I want to see outlets for conversations about the social, political, and economic issues we face in our society. That’s the Star Trek I want back. The characters and set pieces themselves do not make Star Trek what is it. It’s the stories that it tells with those characters.
Please, make Star Trek relevant again. Empower people. ALL PEOPLE. Women, men, people of all color, orientation, etc. We have too much apocalyptic fiction out there, where the only hero worth noting is the tough average joe. Give me a future where we continue to learn and grow by embracing our differences and working together.
I’ve seen this post before with this commentary, but I’d forgotten how spot-on it is.
Yeah to this! I mean, I’m one of the traditionalists raging over the rewritten history, but for pete’s sake - the reboot had opportunities right there! Okay, ditch Janice Rand - but you introduced Gaila. Why the heck couldn’t she be on the “Enterprise” serving right alongside Uhura? Why introduce a female character and then throw her away?
You don’t want Chapel? Fine, where’s our Assistant CMO to fill the part of Doctor M’Benga?
Instead of Keenser, comedy relief turn alien, how about giving us a little bit more of some of the background crew you’ve created, like your cyborg/cybernetic character, or ‘Madeline’, or the rest of them?
I’ll happily stop moaning about the Good Old Days if you remember the idea of the Trek universe, which is yes, adventure in space, but also why they’re going out into space in the first place. The two reboot movies have been reactive - a threat appears and has to be dealt with. Give us a reboot movie that has them being proactive, instead; that shows us the “Enterprise” and the Federation going out into the black and discovering “strange new worlds, new civilisations”.
Just read everything above. Great commentary.
I really don’t think you can get any more spot on than this.
An equal number of women to men on the crew (no more of the damn 2:1 ratio!), genderqueer and trans* characters, people with sexual orientations other than heterosexual, more people of colour than white characters, a Muslim character - Star Trek needs all of this.
In the 60s when Gene made the original series it was revolutionary to have an African woman and an Asian man and a Russian as valued members of the crew.
The spin-offs since then still managed to push the boundaries, for their time, but even they started to fall behind when they maintained that dreaded 2:1 male to female ratio of main characters, and of course, when they failed to include an LGBT character (it can of course be argued that Jadzia Dax did tick this box, but she was all we had in FIVE series!).
If Star Trek is going to move forward in the 21st century it needs to once again be revolutionary - including more female characters and LGBT characters and people of colour isn’t even all that revolutionary any more, there are so many other shows stepping up to the plate.
So whoever does end up making a new series needs to realise that including a token gay character or putting the few female characters we do have in their underwear just won’t cut it any more.
We need Star Trek to be revolutionary again. We need it to push boundaries and empower a new generation of people. We need it to once again boldly go where no one has gone before.
"You want to take my picture? Sure. In Indonesia I was a model for 15 years."
"But I was also a psychologist."
"Oh, wow! It must’ve been difficult to balance the two."
"It’s all about discipline. Now I am a Member of Parliament. I am spending the week in New York working with the World Health Organization on a medical bill."
*Taken in Harvard Square. And I got her number. How do you like them apples?
Some people say that the reason there are so many autistics on tumblr is that it’s somehow trendy or something.
But it’s actually that tumblr is cognitively accessible to some autistic people in ways that no other form of interaction is.
someone told me once (i think it was ray!!) that it’s basically this fantastic combination of echolalia (reblogging) and parallel interaction where you’re not required to interact with anyone but if you have people on your dash it’s like you’re not alone
so yeah, i’d say it can be fantastic
This is the perfect explanation
Harvey Nichols: Norwegian Rain x COAL by ACF
Basically one of the most outstanding pop-up projects one could hope for, featuring some of my friends and style icons as well. A must-see…