They look like they’re in a heist movie with Rihanna as the tough-as-nails leader/master thief and Lupita as the genius computer hacker
!!!!! So here for this!
Hello! I know this is a departure from your usual programming but I hope it makes your day! I am an african-american actress, writer and producer in LA. I have recently debuted my web series about five girls who mysteriously get powers and have to learn to deal wit them and each other. It’s an ALL poc cast featuring Vyvy Nguyen as one of our wickedest witches!
I hope you enjoy! If you do please share with the community!
All the best!
I WANT EVERYONE TO TAKE FIVE MINUTES OUT OF THEIR DAY TO WATCH THIS BECAUSE WITCHES AND WOC AND WOC WITCHES AND LITERALLY EVERYTHING I HAVE EVER WANTED IN A SHOW IM SCREAMING WITH JOY
1. i really love that she is, like, educatedly dismissive of this wrongheaded question — which, lbr, is essentially asking, “oh, did you steal these ideas from the men you like?” — like, “no, also, if you knew anything you’d know how little sense this even makes to ask.”
2. i also love what she says about “experimental” techniques for the very vain and self-glorifying reason that that has always been my hunch with them as, like, a reader, at least with novels and at least when i thought they were any good (and i guess even when i thought they weren’t). and, needless to say, certainly this was my experience of nw.
3. i also also love that although american outfitters is a company that exists i am like 90% sure that actually she meant urban outiftters but got the name wrong.
4. in the linked article there’s a list of books she recommends and i have read, like, none of them actually, but one of them is by clarice lispector! yay. (and actually i did read it, according to an old livejournal entry of mine, but i have LITERALLY no recollection of it at all so i don’t count it.)
Virginia Woolf, The Pargiters: The Novel-Essay Portion of THE YEARS (via volchitza)
#except these days it’s also the inverse#i detest the masculine point of view; i am bored by his self-aggrandizing; his moral relativism; his brutal self-forgiveness#i think the best these men can do is not talk about idealized and brutalized antihero versions of themselves anymore
Recently, my husband and I burned through S1 of Orphan Black, which, as promised by virtually the entire internet, was awesome. But in all the praise I’d seen for it, a line from one review in particular stuck in my mind. The reviewer noted that, although the protagonist, Sarah, is an unlikeable character, her grifter skills make her perfectly suited to unravelling the mystery in which she finds herself. And as this was a positive review, I kept that quote in mind when we started watching, sort of by way of prewarning myself: you maybe won’t like Sarah, but that’s OK.
But here’s the thing: I fucking loved Sarah. I mean, I get what the reviewer was trying to say, in that she’s not always a sympathetic character, but that’s not the same as her actually being unlikeable. And the more I watched, the more I found myself thinking: why is this quality, the idea of likeability, considered so important for women, but so optional for men – not just in real life, but in narrative? Because when it comes to guys, we have whole fandoms bending over backwards to write soulful meta humanising male characters whose actions, regardless of their motives, are far less complex than monstrous. We take male villains and redeem them a hundred, a thousand times over – men who are murderers, stalkers, abusers, kinslayers, traitors, attempted or successful rapists; men with personal histories so bloody and tortured, it’s like looking at a battlefield. In doing this, we exhibit enormous compassion for and understanding of the nuances of human behaviour – sympathy for circumstance, for context, for motive and character and passion and rage, the heartache and, to steal a phrase, the thousand natural shocks that flesh is heir to; and as such, regardless of how I might feel about the practice as applied in specific instances, in general, it’s a praiseworthy endeavour. It helps us to see human beings, not as wholly black and white, but as flawed and complicated creatures, and we need to do that, because it’s what we are.
But when it comes to women, a single selfish or not-nice act – a stolen kiss, a lie, a brushoff – is somehow enough to see them condemned as whores and bitches forever. We readily excuse our favourite male characters of murder, but if a woman politely turns down a date with someone she has no interest in, she’s a timewasting user bimbo and god, what does he even see in her? Don’t get me wrong, I’ve seen some great online meta about, for instance, the soulfulness and moral ambiguity of Black Widow, but I’ve also seen a metric fucktonne more about what that particular jaw-spasm means in that one GIF of Cumberbatch/Ackles/Hiddleston/Smith alone, and that’s before you get into the pages-long pieces about why Rumplestiltskin or Hook or Spike or Bucky Barnes or whoever is really just a tortured woobie who needs a hug. Hell, I’m guilty of writing some of that stuff myself, because see above: plus, it’s meaty and fun and exactly the kind of analysis I like to write.
And yet, we tend overwhelmingly not to write it about ladies. It’s not just our cultural obsession with pushing increasingly specific variants of the Madonna/Whore complex onto women, such that audiences are disinclined to extend to female characters the same moral/emotional licenses they extend to men; it’s also a failure to create narratives where the women aren’t just flawed, but where the audience is still encouraged to like them when they are.
Returning to Orphan Black, for instance, if Sarah were male, he’d be unequivocally viewed as either a complex, sympathetic antihero or a loving battler with a heart of gold. I mean, the ex-con trying to go straight and get his daughter back while still battling the illegalities of his old life and punching bad guys? Let me introduce you to Swordfish, Death Race, and about a millionty other stories where a father’s separation from a beloved child, whether as a consequence of his actual criminal actions, shiftless neglect, sheer bad luck or a combination of all three, is never couched as a reason why he might not be a fit parent. We tend to accept, both culturally and narratively, that men who abandon their children aren’t automatically bad dads; they just have other, important things to be doing first, like coming to terms with parenthood, saving the world, escaping from prison or otherwise getting their shit together. But Sarah, who left her child in the care of someone she trusted absolutely, has to jump through hoops to prove her maternal readiness on returning; has to answer for her absence over and over again. And on one level, that’s fine; that’s as it should be, because Sarah’s life is dangerous. And yet, her situation stands in glaring contrast to every returning father who’s never been asked to do half so much, because women aren’t meant to struggle with motherhood, to have to try to succeed: we’re either maternal angels or selfish absentees, and the idea that we might sometimes be both or neither isn’t one you often see depicted with such nuance."
Nobody’s kissing my lips!
You know, I never really got to talk about how great I think this scene is. I know a lot of people are talking shit about them in the tags (yes, I’ve been reading all of your tags, thanks xkit) and a good deal of them say something like “when girls pretend to be lesbians for attention” or “straight girls be like” and I think that’s kind of like???? You’re missing the point?? One of the things OITNB does is show the variety of the spectrum of the Kinsey Scale (which is flawed and often inaccurately used anyway) and this scene kinda plays into that. Between Piper’s bi/pan sexuality, Poussey and Taystee’s will-they-won’t-they-straight-lesbian-tension, Lorna’s “only into girls while I’m in prison” attitude, and the other many evolving sexualities this show portrays, this scene was another discussion of experimentation.
In context, this is two very close friends talking about how lonely they feel, and one is heart broken, then they share a moment of intimacy. They make out for a bit (because c’mon, kissing is nice) then laugh about it afterwards. It’s cute, yes, but they weren’t into it and that’s okay. There are plenty of reasons why two people wouldn’t be into kissing each other, like lack of physical attraction or feeling uncomfortable with the situation. More importantly, it’s a scene that shows a kiss between two women a) without demonizing or mocking female sexuality, b) objectifying it — which this show has been criticized with doing for some other same-sex relationships, c) encouraging healthy and consensual experimentation but not pressurizing it, which is perfectly okay. A lot of people don’t get to examine their sexuality because people are very quick to tell them to stick with one thing or stop pretending to be something they’re not. Not to mention, this gets rid of that age old stereotype that women are only in same-sex relationships because they didn’t have a man in their life so another woman is essentially a stand-in.
But this was nice because Flaca and Martiza tried something new, which they found wasn’t for them, and they didn’t have to do some awkward unrequited attraction thing after or laughing about those silly lesbians, haha look we still clung to our heterosexuality even when we had no man and were surrounded by hot women, etc etc. It’s natural and it flows and honestly, I think it makes their relationship even better. That said, I still ship them to Litchfield and back.
p sure that this is my favorite photo of all time
someone please make this into fan art
Photographer/ Creative Director: by Nyree Mackenzie Nyree Photo
Model: Gisèle Pletzer
Stylist / Fashion Director: Tamzen Holland Fashion-Stylist