peopleareaproblem asked: Hey so I'm just gonna go ahead and admit that I was one of the people who defended Disney about the no-POC-in-Frozen thing because I legitimately did not think there were any black people in Scandinavia when it takes place. Not only has your blog made it abundantly clear that there were, you've also helped me understand that that isn't even the point, especially considering the willing suspension of disbelief a fantasy film requires in the first place. So, you know. Thank you for that.
I’m happier about the second half of that, to be honest. I think it’s the tangible, visible evidence that really makes people stop for a second and actually THINK, and then once thinking happens, the rest follows: i.e., “Wait, WHY do I think this in the first place? Why do I feel invested in defending something that harms people?”
Or even “Why do I think a multi-billion-dollar corporation and media machine needs me to defend it?”
Another thing that racists like to say in the whole “keeping our white media white” neverending debacle is, “If you don’t like it, make your own instead of criticizing ours”. Not only does this completely ignore the power differential between freaking Disney, and a person of color trying to break into any sort of business endeavor, you get stuff like this:
Gee, wonder what upset them…
Could it be….
(The first shot is of a random woman at the party; the second and third are a pivotal character in a flashback scene-both are Black women in late 1700s period gowns.)
While Sleepy Hollow as a show is generally where historical accuracy goes to die (and openly admits it!) It’s the “diversity” i.e., casting Black actors and actresses, that people seem to have a huge problem with.
I’d say that what raging racists and Hollywood apologists find most offensive in your tumblr is that everyone else is actually listening.
I think you make a rather interesting point here, not only in that apparently people are listening, but also that the sheer violence of the reactions to children’s films goes to show just how desperately important it is that people of color are represented.
Which is interesting when you consider that once the “historical accuracy” argument is exhausted, the absolute deluge of “How DARE you care about something so unimportant as a kid’s movie!!!” comes right afterwards.
After all, why violently defend something with that kind of actual rage if it isn’t important? Making sure only people who look like you are seen in media consumed by mostly children, seems like a rather important agenda to have if you prefer that the status remain quo, so to speak. Children, who are more vulnerable to internalizing messages that devalue them, which is backed up by science if science is your thing.
I want to be able to relate to character too, just FYI, and I can’t relate to poc, handicapped, agendered woman, so like?
That says wayyyyyyy more about YOU than it does any of the people you’re shittily attempting to describe
And before you get your panties in a twist over “why are you attacking meee”
YOU’RE THE ONE WHO BROUGHT THIS SHIT UP YOU TAINT LESION
What the fuck are you hoping to gain by bitching about “some people just want too much representation and I can’t relate to them so shut up”
Why the hell do people want fucking person of color, bi gendered, handicapped, asexual, pink haired fucking people in everything? THATS KINDA EXCESSIVE DONT YOU THINK???
Actually, you know what I think is MUCH better described as excessive? Reality, which is the opposite of what you’re fucking complaining about:
- Autostraddle, GLAAD’s “Where We Are On TV” Shows Best Place To Be On TV Is Behind The Camera (via realtimelord)
Ok, it looks like I stirred things up a bit with my last post.
It is NOT a race thing. I’m asian, a WOC of myself and married to a caucasian man. My post wasn’t about Abbie being a WOC, or stereotyping her in any way, and Ichabod being caucasian or that Ichabod and Katrina are in some way still married. I also don’t ship any of the characters on the show.
I was merely just voicing my personal opinion on why two attractive leads of the opposite sex (of whatever race or color) can’t remain just friends? Does it have to lead to a romance? It’s like saying, men and women in the workplace (whether in fiction or real life) can’t remain friends. “Two people, in the workplace, feelings develop”… that sort of thing. Sexual tension will always rear its head.
I just think it would be a refreshing change to have two leads (not just this show but possibly future shows, and again, race doesn’t matter) remain friends/best friends just fighting crime/demons or what have you. That’s all.
Now back to regularly scheduled programming.
In this case, not all WoC are treated/regarded equally. A black woman is never, EVER cast as a legitimate choice of a love match for a lead/someone folk care about. And if she is, it’s usually for a brief period or it happens off screen. So, the pushback against it happening now is playing into that particular history, not merely “why can’t there be platonic het leads?” Why can’t a black woman be cherished and revered and loved by a lead on MULTIPLE occasions before we begin demanding equity in that regard first. It’s basically folk wanting Abbie to stay in the typical black female lane of “asexual” BFF in spite of the insane nonplatonic chemistry she has with her partner, and that’s simply unfair.
I’m going to need women who are not black to stop trying to tell black women what we should want to see in media. Are you a visibly black woman in America? No? Then stop telling black American women what media depictions are good for us. Kthxbye.