I really hope MAWS listens to criticisms like yours and improves in future seasons
I wish, but I wouldn't get my hopes up personally. The show has essentially universal praise so far, and criticism in the bigger discourse is largely dismissed as coming from "bigoted dudebros mad at diversity" and "at least MAWS triiied" which. Oy, haha. The usual critics I've seen who've come down so much harder on shows like cw Supergirl are suddenly so forgiving of MAWS.
I'll stick to fanon spaces :p
10 notes
·
View notes
"A cornation reflecting multi-faith Britain"
Charles Defender of ALL Faiths
The unprecedented joint declaration from other religious leaders reads: "Your Majesty, as neighbours in faith, we acknowledge the value of public service. We unite with people of all faiths and beliefs in thanksgiving, and in service with you for the common good."
Something that would never occur in a mosque or temple:
After the Christian coronation service, the chief rabbi will join British Muslim, Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist leaders in making a spoken declaration in unison towards their newly crowned king.
"It will be quite brief, but exceptionally powerful," Mirvis said, while stressing that he was not required to speak into an electronic microphone in the abbey, again to respect the Jewish holy day.
@hunnymae @honeytothebee
@sandiedog3 @skippyv20 @lovelycariad
"And it's not just within the Jewish faith. I know that members of other faiths as well hugely appreciate this. And now to be included in the coronation service, it's very special."
The service at Westminster Abbey will be overwhelmingly drawn from the Christian liturgy as Charles takes an oath to serve as "Defender of the (Protestant) Faith" and to protect the established Church of England.
23 notes
·
View notes
Let’s talk about some of the problems with Star Trek. There are obviously real-world, behind-the-scenes reasons for many of the things we don’t like about Star Trek, and they’re usually pretty messed up. A very non-comprehensive list includes but certainly is not limited to:
Geordi being bad with women - racism
Geordi and Worf being the people of color on the cast but in heavy make-up - racism/othering
Harry Kim not getting a promotion - racism (see: model minority)
Klingons all being black/dark skinned (pre ~2001 at least cause that’s mostly what I know) but sometimes played by white actors - racism (see: blackface)
Chakotay’s whole deal - racism (see: noble savage)
The Kazon not assimilated by the Borg - anti-black racism
Deanna Troi not wearing a uniform - sexism
Seven of Nine not wearing a uniform - sexism
Jadzia getting killed off - sexism
Ezri’s poor reception - sexism again
Miles/Keiko/Kira’s baby situation - theres a post going around calling it misogynistic and it’s a pretty good take
B’Elanna being reduced to angry Klingon - Racism and sexism double whammy (see: spicy Latina)
Keiko being perceptually reduced to nagging wife even though that’s not what her actions necessarily portray - racism and sexism double whammy again
Beverly Crusher’s trill episode - homophobia
DS9 flirting with different expressions of sexuality (many characters) but barely committing - homophobia
Pike’s fate - ableism
DS9 Augments - ableism
Later iterations of Spock losing the Jewish coding - antisemitism
I’ll stop the list there since we can keep pulling examples out as nauseam and find examples of any of the -isms, any of the -phobias either within the media itself or behind the scenes but especially in some of the fan spaces. There’s plenty of ethnic/religious/gender/sexuality coding, erasure, contradictions, and many other things that can be pulled out and dissected in ~900 hours of a franchise made over 6 decades. (Keep adding examples if you want, since mine do not cover the whole spectrum of the franchise and barely even touch alien species that also have issues.)
Star Trek is undeniably made in a capitalist Hollywood production company, so white supremacy, heteronormativity, and dominant cultural tendencies usually end up dictating what gets put on air. Hollywood has a dominant thread of white supremacy throughout its history, so even intentionally trying to diversify staff and talent is difficult because of the systems feeding into Hollywood or other industries/institutions. There can also be a great deal of privilege working in the favor of successful artists - not always but something to consider.
Additionally, Trek presents itself as a post-scarcity, futuristic utopia, and sometimes things stick out to us if they don’t meld with our personal understanding of what that would look like.
I’m sure we’ve all heard a little about the old production schedules, long days, demanding schedules, rotating writers, rotating directors, etc etc. It has been proven that implicit bias can drive decisions, especially when people are busy. Even if the production isn’t explicitly motivated by these things, they seep into the work. The -isms and -phobias are sometimes reduced to characteristics of a person/piece of media, but it’s sometimes more useful to characterize actions instead of people since it allows better conversation about the topics. Sometimes it is intentional and explicit, sometimes it’s not. The intention does not affect the impact, so how a storyline or message lands on the audience/viewer is important. Science fiction in particular is a genre that makes social commentary, so by design it lends itself to deeper analysis.
We also can’t forget that the shows are products of their respective times, and a lot of what was shown was pushing against cultural boundaries. For the most part, the franchise has tried to explicitly be diverse, but they are bound to make missteps in other areas, intentional or not. No piece of media is perfect or above scrutiny.
Now, all of that said, there are many schools of thought for how to analyze media. I’m not gonna give a whole crash course in literary criticism but we can look at it from a continuum of different perspectives. We can wonder what the production meant when they made it/what happened off camera (author intentionality), we can draw from the piece itself (in universe), we can focus on how the media was received either in its cultural context or outside (reader response), or we can do some combination of the three. No media exists in a vacuum, so they all end up working together to make the work.
My main point is this: it is ok to pick your analytical perspective. You can chose to ignore the real-world contributions and intentionality when analyzing media. If people want to stay strictly in universe to come up with reasons why something did or did not happen, that’s ok. If people want to focus on what happened behind the scenes and how that affected the work, fine. If people are just focused on how it made them feel, also great. Just maybe don’t get all worked up because someone is analyzing media from a different viewpoint or someone has a different take than you do.
8 notes
·
View notes
For a movie that markets itself as 'Making Barbie taste the Real WorldTM' and deconstructing what it means to be Barbie, it sure does dismiss the whole discussion for-against Barbie by looking the audience in the eye and saying, in an uwu voice: "You wouldn't dare ignore BarbieLandTM! Why do you hate women's hopes and dreams?"
Because, for some reason, a world in which women ostracize someone for being too WeirdTM (unless it's convenient), in which women are scared of getting cellulite, in which everyone's an educated professional but spends their free time partying, in which women's rights can be destroyed by the wrong people voting, and which in the behind-the-scenes-work is done by a bunch of conservative men (whose biases and how that affects Barbieland are somehow inconsequential) is the best Feminism can hope for.
No, there is no greater consciousness on how gendered oppression works, why would you ask?
11 notes
·
View notes
Im sorry but I don't think anon says that Azre is bad. Just saying in general that it takes more effort to good writing than to say: Look. Diversity! Without putting any actual work and thought into it - which you certainly had.
Like : No. A poc doesn't make a story automatically better for existing, but if its well written it certainly can and shows consideration.
but have we actually said that. no, we've said that the inclusion of poc from day one when a major part of the story is around racial struggles & trauma serves far better than rwby waiting three years to have anyone with a skin tone darker than milk on screen & having the face of their racism storyline be a pale skinned, european based white princess of an appropriative island.
anon is losing their shit because we think & know that azre is better than rwby in a lot of the things it tries to do. it's really not hard considering the writing team consists of 4 monkeys slamming on type writers pretending they're shakespeare while using their queer & poc fans for monetary gain. ✨
10 notes
·
View notes