prof_pangaea: the master (Default)
re: livejournal's new facebook and twitter connect "feature", also known as "what is this absolute fuckery?": anyone who wants to use that feature on any entry of mine, locked or unlocked, please feel free to defriend me right now. anyone not on my flist who wants to use that feature on any entry of mine: if i find out, i will ban you. i have never banned anyone from my journal, ever, but this feature is an invasion of privacy that is so blatant is astonishes me, and i don't want to be part of it.

it's quite likely i will take this failtastic policy as the impetus to finally set up my dreamwidth account all nice and proper and start posting from there. feel free to follow me over there, whether i have you friended or not. i don't lock much content in any case. but when i do, weirdly enough, i don't want random people on facebook and twitter to be able to read excerpts of it. crazy, i know!

ngl, i was avoiding moving from lj. because i've been here a long time, because this is where the comms are, because dreamwidth is a bit of a shit name for a social networking/blogging site. but hey, i'll take a shit name over not being able to control where my content is posted while being bombarded by invasive pop-up ads for inane trash that make me long for the destruction of western civilisation.
prof_pangaea: the master (Default)
a clip from the rex is not your lawyer pilot has surfaced:

the absolute atrocity that is tennant's atempt at an american accent almost distracted me from how shit the writing was. almost.

that said, he's extremely hot. WHEN HE IS NOT TALKING OMG
prof_pangaea: the master (Default)
Is it possible that th notion of “transgendered inidividual” is a contemporary error that ,in the future, will be viewed as similar to witches, werewolves and vampires?

little known facts about trans people: they sparkle in the sun drink human blood, engage in orgies with the devil, and are allergic to silver.

sorry, this is why i had to cancel my plans to attend your fancy dinner party -- i can't use actual silverware! also, i had plans that night to maul a few people to death with my teeth and then fuck satan. next time i'll just bring my own flatware! and a goat, that we can ritually sacrifice together.


me: lolol. but seriously? werewolves? wtffffffffff.
me: :O

prof_pangaea: the master (Default)
once again someone has noticed that a lot of slash is written by straight (white) women, and that a lot of slash is appropriative and fetishistic, so once again there is much hand-wringing and many desperate attempts to justify taking over sites like in order to complain about how homophobic russell t davies is for killing off fandom's woobie (weirdly enough, no one tried similar tactics after bisexual toshiko was killed, i can't imagine why), as well as the writing of stories where RTD is hit by a bus, or subjected to homophobic abuse, in order to put him in his place. meanwhile other parts of fandom are setting up straw man posts such as, "should women be allowed to write slash??" as if anyone has ever seriously told them the answer is no. people are horrified that slash might be the equivalent of girl on girl porn made for straight guys, because... er, i'm not sure why. because that erases all of the completely imaginary gay activism that straight slashers think they've indulged in by liking boysnogs? who knows. but apprently that meant the hunt was ON for something new to compare slash to!

so now slash is just like drag? seriously? i'm no expert on drag, other than having gone to a few shows (which is probably more than many of these "omg THIS!" commenters have done) and yet somehow i know that drag is a very complex practise with hundreds, even thousands of years of history behind it, that is enacted differently in every culture, that has roots in performance, ritual, and the arts, as well as purely "gay" culture. yes, those kirk/spock zines your aunt used to collect are pretty old, but it's not quite the same! and yet someone has written the following:

My standard line in this argument is comprised of two words: drag queens. Which I expand thus: women (most women) understand that (some) gay men have created a really distinctive and important form of cultural expression, saying things they couldn't say otherwise, through the adoption of female avatars from popular culture. And it seems to me that gay men should understand that (some) women have created a different and yet equally important form of cultural expression, saying things they couldn't say otherwise, by adopting male avatars. As a woman, I have been mostly--but not always and entirely--welcome in gay male spaces, and I think that women should mostly--but not always and entirely--welcome gay men into their spaces. So I think the parallel isn't to lesbian porn, but to drag (even the power relationships are more parallel, and I think drag better demonstrates the power of the alliance between women and gay men.)

aaaaaaand of course the comments are filled with "oh god, this parallel is PERFECT because now i don't have to worry about thinking about appropriation anymore. thanks!!" even though all drag is not about or from "gay" culture ("gay" seemingly standing in for modern, western, male, cis, white, homosexual culture, of course) let me just say (more to the people so eagerly jumping at anything that will let them off the hook of having to think about the realities of intersectionality and appropriation than the original poster, whom i think is wrong, but seems thoughtfully wrong, at least): way to attempt to appropriate even more gay culture for yourselves, slashers. oh, by the way, fuck off.

in all seriousness, why are people still arguing that slash is inherently about women using men to tell women's stories? am i in a coma, mad, or have i travelled back in time? is it crazy for me to write/read slash because i want to write/read about the two characters, and not shitty author avatars? being a female writer means a woman will probably always write with certain awarenesses or experiences that have been informed by being female, not that they're always writing about women in disguise.

obviously, in professional fiction men are the default and so harry potter has to have a male protagonist if it's going to become a "universal" phenomenon, but frankly the same market forces are not at work in fandom, because we're not selling anything. obviously the same cultural forces ARE at work, since so many people seem to think that a story about women can only be interesting if the women have cocks, but hey, we knew that. people just need to stop using thinly disguised internalised misogyny as an excuse for why slash is just "inherently" more interesting and own up to the fact that they like to get off (emotionally or sexually) on boysnogs. there is nothing morally wrong with this until people start declaring that the fact that they like to fetishise said boysnogging means they are true liberal activists/feminists/performers of important cultural expression. boysnogs =/= important cultural expression in and of themselves -- it's the stories you try to tell with them. and guess what? good stories are usually about people, not fetishised objects.

tl;dr: soz if the thought that much of slash really *is* the equivalent of girl on girl distresses you so much, but it is. most slash is like some unholy combination of girl on girl porn and the movie shoot 'em up, except the slash version of shoot 'em up would replace the paul giamatti character with one played by jason isaacs, and would replace the scene where clive owen fucks monica belluci in the middle of a gunfight with a scene where clive owen fucks james mcavoy in the middle of a gunfight. and yes, i would watch this.

ps: am going to utah tomorrow to visit family and finally meet my baby nephew, so if i'm not around for a bit that's why. pls to not be burning down the internets in my absence. <3
prof_pangaea: the master (Default)
livejournal decided it was time to add to the genderfail rolling around right now and so it's about to make gender a required field upon account creation (not sure about existing accounts), plus it's going to take away the "unspecified" option and force users to choose whether they are "male" or "female". which is obviously a big deal to the large number of users and potential users who do not identify within the gender binary for whatever reason. while you won't have to make the information public, you will still be forced to choose.

this is pretty obviously being done so lj can offer more targeted personal info to advertisers -- which of course means that anyone listing "female" is likely to be getting ads about dieting, and those listing "male" will probably be getting even more of those "get ripped in four weeks without exercising!" ads i keep seeing everywhere.

synecdochic has a good post on the whole thing over on dreamwidth:

meanwhile, the code change is likely to go into effect very soon (thursday or maybe thursday next, i think?), so spread the word and send livejournal (polite!) feedback here.

meanwhile, this all reminds me i actually have a journal at dreamwidth. which i should probably start using. hmmmmm.
prof_pangaea: the master (Default)
hey everyone, i'm sure there's lots of fun to be had with the most recent wank about victoria bitter/[ profile] thanfiction/etc, but if anyone tries to justify using pronouns like "she", "he/she", "it", etc when talking about him, then i'm sure you wouldn't mind if i took you off of my friends-list.

of course, and i actually say this quite confidently, i have a great friends-list, so i would never expect that anyway. ilu guys.
prof_pangaea: the master (it's a gas mask)
this probably doesn't need to be said to anyone who will actually read it, but i thought i'd make it clear nontheless. statements that are inappropriate in all circumstances:

Also, while it's not exactly on the subject, I'd be unwilling to accept a Doctor that is non-Caucasian appearing. And no, this is not due to any latent racist views on my part. I just don't see the character working that way.

I don't want a black Doctor. Because I want to fancy him and I don't really find black men attractive.

saying the doctor can't be non-white because the character doesn't "work that way"? racist. justifying not wanting a black doctor because you don't find black men attractive? racist. no, this is not up for debate. this should be clear, and yet apparently isn't to some people. mentioning that statements like this are racist is not an attack against whoever might have said it. it's a statement of fact. if someone says something racist they can own up to the racism of their statement or try and explain it away, it doesn't change facts.

i was much wordier in other places but ya'll shouldn't need this to be explained to you so i think we're good.


prof_pangaea: the master (Default)

August 2017

6 789101112
1314151617 1819


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

  • Style: Sindë for Ciel by nornoriel

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 20th, 2017 11:02 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios