Do we all face stereotypes, of course. The question is, do all stereotypes carry the same weight ?
|what did you think about frozen after watching it?|
okay i kinda went into this before and this is probably the last time im gonna talk seriously about frozen on this blog (just tired of it by now really)
first and foremost, the thing people keep skirting around to squabble over animation errors and other pointless junk: FROZEN IS RACIST. racist as SHIT and if you disagree then you’re probably a willfully ignorant raging disney fan and also undeniably racist. sorry hard facts to face but it’s more than likely true.
- they used Sami people as an “inspiration” without paying any respect to Sami culture. they ABSOLUTELY appropriated an indigenous culture, and what’s worse, they tore it apart, discarded most of it and whitewashed it to the point that HARDLY ANYONE CAN TELL SAMI CULTURE WAS EVER EVEN INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS. WOW WHITE PEOPLE ARE SO GOOD AT THAT. BUT IT DOESNT MATTER CAUSE IT WAS PRETTY RIGHT??? THEY WORKED SO HAAAARD WHO CARES IF THEY’RE RACIST.
- that chilling, moving chanting in the beginning of the movie that so many people love? that’s a Sami yoik, a traditional Sami song.
- how about that goofy reindeer? reindeer husbandry is a HUGE aspect of Sami culture (and many indigenous cultures since ancient times- reindeer are thought to be the first domesticated animal) like i know you see it as just an animal BUT IT’S NOT JUST AN ANIMAL TO SAMI PEOPLE. if you even casually research Sami culture you would know this, and obviously Disney researched this enough to know about yoik songs and reindeer herding.
- SAMI PEOPLE WERE FORCED TO ASSIMILATE and colonized by white people (sound familiar), and one of the main reasons their culture and language survived was because of areas they continued to herd reindeer.
- "Today, in Norway and Sweden, reindeer husbandry is legally protected as an exclusive Sami livelihood, such that only persons of Sami descent with a linkage to a reindeer herding family can own, and hence make a living off, reindeer." REINDEER ARE SO FUCKING IMPORTANT TO THEIR CULTURE IT’S A LEGALLY PROTECTED RIGHT NOW. kind of gross to use a reindeer in such a slapstick manner, especially when Sami culture has pretty much been drained out of the movie, isn’t it? not to mention all the obvious errors in research, as in, reindeer have no problems on ice, you can’t ride a reindeer like a horse, etc etc…. but that’s besides the point.
- SAMI WERE PREDOMINANTLY POC. it’s kind of like american indians these days- yes, some of us are still brown, but MANY of us are white-passing. THATS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU’RE COLONIZED, TURNED INTO SEXUAL SLAVES AND FORCED TO ASSIMILATE. people like to pull up pictures of modern Sami and scoff at this debate like they even know what they’re talking about- no, you shitwads. you sad, sad little fucks. fantasy, fiction, magical, whatever- if it’s set in a historical timeframe, it should pay respect to historical facts.
- KRISTOFF SHOULD HAVE BEEN A MOC. it’s not surprising he was whitewashed- if they had modeled him accurately IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE FIRST INTERRACIAL COUPLE IN A DISNEY MOVIE FEATURING A WHITE WOMAN + MOC. huh, there’s plenty of disney white man + woc couples. wonder why that is??
"but ooorreeeee!! i can’t face my blatant acceptance of racism, cultural appropriation of indigenous cultures doesn’t mean jack to me… what was wrong with the STORY? it had so much heart, it was a perfect movie!!!…"
WELL OK THEN HOTSHOT LETS JUST DIVE IN TO ALL THE OTHER REASONS FROZEN WAS AWFUL.
- Anna is the most boring character i’ve EVER seen disney pull out of their ass. she’s basically an even more dense and bland version of Rapunzel, not just in looks! but in naive, “omg so awk” personality, and even more useless to boot. (at least Rapunzel had some character development and mad hair lassoing skills.)
- Kristoff is a total shitwad meathead, whose charming introduction was getting into Anna’s personal space and intimidating her out of his way. wow, such a stud. blossoming romance there. total feminist movie when the hero/love interest belittles the heroine/main character every chance he gets.
- Hans was a terrible villain. the whole “keep him the nicest guy ever so people flip out when he’s a total asshole” thing is soooo lazy and honestly doesn’t even make sense. the first scene we see him in, Anna runs off and he gets dropped into the water- he surfaces, all alone, and instead of being pissed off or at least annoyed that he got soaked (pretty standard reaction for anybody) he smiles dreamily like its nbd, like he’s just the sweetest thing that ever lived. at nobody. no one around to impress. that scene should have just been cut, tbh, because it’s too unrealistic and contrived to have moments like that and then whip around and say “ah-ha!! he’s been planning it all along!”
- Anna and Hans was actually PROBABLY one of the most believable disney romances i’ve ever seen. they connected, they hit it off, the sense of humor was there and the chemistry was just right. infatuation set in. this is super, super clumsy writing because ohhh my god, this whole movie becomes a broken record of “ur so DUMB, anna!! you only knew him for a night!!” but in the end Mr. Right is evil, everybody and their mother knew Anna’s true feelings before she did, and SHE STILL ENDED UP WITH SOMEONE SHE’D ONLY KNOWN FOR A COUPLE DAYS. the entire movie was a shame-fest for being crazy for a dude she just met, and then it ended with her hooking up with ANOTHER dude she’d only just met!!
- this movie was really, really sexist. i don’t know why everyone’s calling it so feminist or saying it’s a movie about sisters, because the sisterly stuff probably only took up 15% of the movie, and i can’t even think of anything feminist about it.
- sexism exhibit A) Kristoff berates her and judges her, as a stranger, multiple times (so many times i wanted to barf) for wanting to marry someone she’d just met. is marrying someone you’ve just met a good idea? no, of course not. who’s business is that, though? a planned love interest, i guess. it sent this message over and over that men are the rational ones, and any man who would agree to a marriage like that is up to something (bc men aren’t that irrational of course)
- sexism exhibit B) Anna couldn’t do shit on her own, and it was played for laughs. silly Anna. you think you’re so capable but ha ha ha you’re not. you need a man to save you, or shit, just a snowman will do.
- sexism exhibit C) remember the “girls have to be pretty” comment? because of that, nONE of the female characters showed any believable range of emotions, they were always graceful and pretty and cute. pretty shallow whitewashed eyecandy.
- as far as “sisterly” stuff, it was absolutely the only good part of the movie, but calling it “good” is quite a stretch. enjoyable, maybe. worth watching? ehhh. when Anna’s trapped by Hans and he divulges his villainous plan to kill her sister, what does she do when a snowman somehow accidentally picks the right lock on the right door and stumbles upon her weak little body? she starts thinkin’ bout BOYZ. not her sister who’s about to die. naaah, ~~*~*~*~love!~*~*~~*~~
- enter a love life lecture from a fucking snowman who’s only been alive for barely a day. “true luv is like, hmmm, like when kristoff brought you here to hans and left forever, omg, kristoff is so great. thats tru luv, anna. i know you had a whole song and dance number DRILLING IT INTO YOUR BRAIN that you should marry and adore this dorky meathead, but i thought i should remind you. kristoff. omg there he is!! somehow he knew to come back!!”
- ANNA’S FEELINGS DON’T EVEN MATTER. like, i don’t even know who Anna is after she jumps around her castle, bored out of her mind, and then stumbles out into the narrative. there’s no focus on Anna as a person, only her love life and trying to get Elsa to come home and knock off that wintery wiz biz. but her feelings? her thoughts, the way things have changed her? is she even lonely without her sister? is there anything more to her than being easy to laugh at and banter? did anyone even think about that, or was this just some kind of “meh, this first draft is good enough” movie?
- Elsa, to a lesser extent but not enough to matter, is in the same boat. where did her powers come from? how did she get chased out of her home, her kingdom, her castle, by her people, away from her SISTER and whats left of her broken family… end up at a mountain in like 20 mins (can she fly?? Anna ran out in her ball gown and it took her forever to even get close to the mountains on horseback) and then go “fuck it! hahahaha!” and build a castle in glee. where did that come from? she didn’t get any time to reflect, on screen, what just happened, and overcome it. it was literally just “aahhh! fuck fuck fuck damn it oh no” to “lmao im so fucking hot i love me” ??????
- the whole ending with the “omg do i kiss this boy who everyone TELLS me is my tru luv or do i save my sis?? omg im dying!! which one!!” was sooooooooooooooo weak. like, that could have been so much better. and it doesn’t even really matter it all ended on a “sisters4lyf” note because it was all so contrived and jerked into place to get there, it didn’t feel natural and just came outta nowhere. why was it even a QUESTION to kiss kristoff?? if this was such a sisterly movie, shouldn’t Anna have CARED more about her sister? ran off to save her as soon as olaf opened that door? ran over to save her when she saw Hans ready to chop her in two?? that’s the problem- this whole story was so poorly written without any heart or soul or thought to the characters, it doesn’t even resonate or make sense. the characters are flat, boring, and mostly pretty. there was such an emphasis on style and beauty and rendering that they completely overlooked the actual substance to any animated film- the story. the way it unfolds, the way the characters change. it was all forced together so brutally it was just a complete, awkward mess. the villain was forced, the love was forced, the change was forced, and even the narrative itself was force feeding the audience and telling, not showing, them what to think. that’s lazy. thats piss poor writing. even the songs were pretty weak.
and that’s all i have to say about it.
if you liked it- whatever. if there are things in the movie you liked well enough to find it tolerable- whatever. but don’t lie to yourself and say this is some fantastic game changing movie, “disney’s best” since whenever, because all you’re doing is letting disney set it’s own standard based on brand and not product, and that’s a shame. if you expect more, you’ll get more. if you don’t expect anything and you’re ready to gobble up any movie they shit out, soon enough their laziness will get to a point where you’re not even enjoying it anymore, and you’re disappointed.
but crappy writing and characterization aside- THIS MOVIE WAS RACIST. deal with it. it was racist as fuck and that’s actually the most important thing to realize here. expect more from the story, sure, but DEMAND disney to stop appropriating cultures with their own sloppy takes on them. finally come to terms with the fact disney is racist, and stop coddling and sucking up to a fucking industry giant (that doesnt need any of that, seriously, they’re worth billions of fucking dollars and can fund anything they want) and start giving a shit about how DAMAGING disney can be. kid’s movies? yeah, where do you think all these problems start? don’t you think a corporation whose demographic is young children should, uh, TRY a little harder to not spread racism and sexism? so many of you think that movies directed toward children should be taken less seriously and be held to a lower standard, but i think that’s fucking horrible and disgusting. if anything, disney (and any studio that produces content for young people) should be NITPICKED TO THE BONES. criticized for every frame, every word, every message it sends. kids absorb this shit. little girls need to see body diversity. poc NEED to see themselves represented.
kids notice this shit and disney is held in such a high regard, they trust it without question. why the fuck wouldn’t we tear it apart, inch for inch? why wouldn’t we expect excellence, if we’re going to hold disney above all the rest?
(my theory is emotional manipulation, using your childhood memories and fondness for animated films to manipulate a market- generations of people fond of disney, they pass it down to their children and siblings, this sort of brand loyalty that makes people FUCKING INCREDIBLY prone to accepting anything disney makes. this is why Frozen infuriates me, and it’s a goddamn shame everyone takes this kind of junk without question. c’mon. disney is a business, not some wise old geezer telling you bedtime stories. they keep their princesses pretty and white to sell you merch you’ll buy. they toss in a few poc films, skew the facts beyond recognition to uphold whiteness, so you think they’re inclusive and poc can’t complain. give me a fucking break.)
BLESS YOU ORE
shiiiiit i hadn’t realized it was THAT racist. damn.
I am REALLY not seeing this movie in theaters now.
wow this is really cool to read. See, my dash has been acting like the “Frozen is racist” comments are like, asking obligatory poc to be put in and everyone’s like “poc weren’t historically in denmark” “there’s a talking snowman though surly they can have poc”
but yeah THIS is the racism in Frozen, and the sexism, and the general sloppiness that really dissuades me from seeing the movie.
And now you know…
The real “Lone Ranger,” it turns out, was an African American man named Bass Reeves, who the legend was based upon. Perhaps not surprisingly, many aspects of his life were written out of the story, including his ethnicity. The basics remained the same: a lawman hunting bad guys, accompanied by a Native American, riding on a white horse, and with a silver trademark.
Historians of the American West have also, until recently, ignored the fact that this man was African American, a free black man who headed West to find himself less subject to the racist structure of the established Eastern and Southern states.
While historians have largely overlooked Reeves, there have been a few notable works on him. Vaunda Michaux Nelson’s book, Bad News for Outlaws: The Remarkable Life of Bass Reeves, Deputy U.S. Marshal, won the 2010 Coretta Scott King Award for best author. Arthur Burton released an overview of the man’s life a few years ago. Black Gun, Silver Star: The Life and Legend of Frontier Marshal Bass Reeves recounts that Reeves was born into a life of slavery in 1838. His slave-keeper brought him along as another personal servant when he went off to fight with the Confederate Army, during the Civil War.
Reeves took the chaos that ensued during the war to escape for freedom, after beating his “master” within an inch of his life, or according to some sources, to death. Perhaps the most intruiging thing about this escape was that Reeves only beat his enslaver after the latter lost sorely at a game of cards with Reeves and attacked him.
After successfully defending himself from this attack, he knew that there was no way he would be allowed to live if he stuck around.
Reeves fled to the then Indian Territory of today’s Oklahoma and lived harmoniously among the Seminole and Creek Nations of Native American Indians.
After the Civil War finally concluded, he married and eventually fathered ten children, making his living as a Deputy U.S. Marshall in Arkansas and the Indian Territory. If this surprises you, it should, as Reeves was the first African American to ever hold such a position.
Burton explains that it was at this point that the Lone Ranger story comes in to play. Reeves was described as a “master of disguises”. He used these disguises to track down wanted criminals, even adopting similar ways of dressing and mannerisms to meet and fit in with the fugitives, in order to identify them.
Reeves kept and gave out silver coins as a personal trademark of sorts, just like the Lone Ranger’s silver bullets. Of course, the recent Disney adaptation of the Lone Ranger devised a clever and meaningful explanation for the silver bullets in the classic tales. For the new Lone Ranger, the purposes was to not wantonly expend ammunition and in so doing devalue human life. But in the original series, there was never an explanation given, as this was simply something originally adapted from Reeves’ personal life and trademarking of himself. For Reeves, it had a very different meaning, he would give out the valuable coins to ingratiate himself to the people wherever he found himself working, collecting bounties. In this way, a visit from the real “Lone Ranger” meant only good fortune for the town: a criminal off the street and perhaps a lucky silver coin.
Like the Lone Ranger, Reeves was also expert crack shot with a gun. According to legend, shooting competitions had an informal ban on allowing him to enter. Like the Lone Ranger, Reeves rode a white horse throughout almost all of his career, at one point riding a light grey one as well.
Like the famed Lone Ranger legend Reeves had his own close friend like Tonto. Reeves’ companion was a Native American posse man and tracker who he often rode with, when he was out capturing bad guys. In all, there were close to 3000 of such criminals they apprehended, making them a legendary duo in many regions.
The final proof that this legend of Bass Reeves directly inspired into the story of the Lone Ranger can be found in the fact that a large number of those criminals were sent to federal prison in Detroit. The Lone Ranger radio show originated and was broadcast to the public in 1933 on WXYZ in Detroit where the legend of Reeves was famous only two years earlier.
Of course, WXYZ and the later TV and movie adaptions weren’t about to make the Lone Ranger an African American who began his career by beating a slave-keeper to death. But now you know. Spread the word and let people know the real legend of the Lone Ranger.
okay no, but for real, this dude was a badass. he was basically the black batman of the wild west.
acording to wiki: “ Reeves brought in some of the most dangerous criminals of the time, but was never wounded, despite having his hat and belt shot off on separate occasions.”
here’s an article that details some of his career.
Admittedly, I would absolutely find this hilarious if I didn’t know the simple fact that the smiling woman is the Prime Minister of Denmark!
The PM and Obama have met lots of times now …
… which is probably why they’re seated next to one another. I mean, come ON, obviously it’s not some random man-stealing bimbo that was placed next to the President of the United States.
But the media loves to pin women up against each other, so for good measure here’s a picture of all three smiling together and one of the two women alone…
Please, signal boost this and stop the idiotic scenario where these two intelligent and powerful women are being reduced to petty women that care only about the attention of a man - even if it is the President of the United States.
The more you know. Now, go forth an have an AWESOME day!
Kinda sad that this post is even necessary.
read an amazing article on how the reception of Michelle Obama’s “disapproving look” reinforces the stereotype about the “mad black woman”. It’s pretty annoying how people simplify her and put her in a box
i interpreted the look as “WE’RE AT NELSON MANDELA’S MEMORIAL ACT LIKE YOU HAVE SOME SENSE”
thank you blacklist
can’t blacklist a gif
Re. that post by nextyearsgirl that’s going around, the one that reads:
It’s not men’s job to subvert, mock, parody, or critique femininity. You don’t get to tell us how much you hate the cage you put us in.
The person who posted this is an anti-trans radfem. She considers trans women to be “men”. She is attacking us with this post by invalidating our identities and experiences.
Please stop reblogging this, alright?
(And now you see why I didn’t just reblog the OP: I don’t want to show up in her notes.)
The GOP has a plan to stop Wendy Davis: blatant voter suppression.
Women don’t like having their bodies policed, and are supporting Davis like no Democrat has been backed before. But Republicans aren’t fighting back on the issues — they’ve pushed through a Voter ID law that blocks the votes of countless Texas women.
Starting this November, Texans must show a photo ID with their up-to-date legal name instead of IDs like a birth certificate. That’s not a problem for single or married men — but it leaves a third of Texas women scrambling in a state with just 81 DMVs in its 254 counties.
The only way the GOP can keep Texas is by rigging the game. Women have the power to turn this state blue for the first time in two decades, but we need to help secure their rights first. Please, join us in calling on the Texas legislature to get rid of this unconstitutional Voter ID lawand stop trying to strip women of their votes.
DANGER! DANGER FOR TEXAS WOMEN!
i don’t think you understand the power that paint tool sai 2 has given us
LOOK AT THIS SHIT
it also has the
long-awaitedfont tool, an overall cleaner/better interface, and a stabilizer for every individual brush
so basically, go get sai2’s beta. it’s great
Yes Means Yes blog: “visions of female sexual power & a world without rape”
Parents, siblings, carers, cousins, teachers, tutors, mentors, aunts, uncles, etc, of young children: we have a chance to mold the gender relations of the future.
Goldie Foxx & Dyna Mink: The perfect stocking filler so you can have a merry sing-along over the festive period…the Studio Killers Instrumental Album is now available to pre-order! Out on the 16th December. Studio Killers iTunes page here: http://bit.ly/IPXjMD