Fanatical Queer Geek

ai-firestarter:

One of my favourite moments ever.

taintedidealist:

jumpysteve:

taintedidealist:

maggiemerc:

swanqueensfairytale:

4x05 

I will defend a lot of issues with this show. I will defend stupid Captain Swan dates because they lasted two seconds and Hook’s redemption arc got kickstarted. I will defend oodles of screen time for Frozen tweens. I will defend make up choices. I will defend Rumpel’s fabulous heels. I will defend all ships because ship what makes you feel good.

But what.

The.

Fuck.

Are Regina’s pants. 

Was she watching a season 1 X-Files marathon, got wind she was going to be traipsing through Canadian forest and just think “worked for Scully.”

Did she see the way Emma wears skinny jeans, get nervous about competing and went the bag route?

Was she just hanging out at home demolishing a package of Oreos and a bag of chips when Emma showed up and begged her to help and she was halfway out the door before she realized what she was wearing?

Is the curse somehow sending her wardrobe BACK in time? Can we next expect high waisted acid wash jeans and tie dye shirts?

I swear to god if those pants were cut any higher we’d be calling them rompers.

Can’t. Stop. Laughing.

Season 1 Scully. So. Accurate.

This entire glorious rant makes me want to write a one-shot just about the pants, the backstory of the pants, the history of the pants…

I ship Regina’s pants.

With Scully’s coat?

taintedidealist:

delightfullyvague:

season 1 scully(source)

Insta-reblog, always

WHEN MY FRIEND GETS SLOPPY DRUNK AND I HAVE TO DELIVER HER TO HER BOYFRIEND

dejanentendu:

college-life-crisis:

image

I almost spit out my water

sourcedumal:

mysharona1987:

This about sums it up.

This just goes to show that misogyny is real. So real.

sourcedumal:

mysharona1987:

This about sums it up.

This just goes to show that misogyny is real. So real.

castielsteenwolf:

pr1nceshawn:

The evolution of Halloween costumes for girls…

this is really important

Girls

fullmetalpuppy:

Some girls are confident

image

some girls are shy

image

some girls like boys

image

some girls like girls

image

sometimes, they like both

image

some girls don’t dress in a feminine way

image

and some do

image

and some girls weren’t born girls, and that’s fine

image



some girls cover up

image

and some girls don’t

image

some girls are bigger

image

some girls are smaller 

image

some girls are smart

image

and some girls aren’t

image

some girls are nice

image

and some girls are mean

image



but no matter what,

all girls are people 

image



and we should be treated like it.

Sara Lance was being hunted for literally the whole time she was in Arrow, Yes I'm sad she's gone, but her death was inevitable, it wasn't some conspiracy too kill the gays.
Anonymous

I never said it was a conspiracy, but it is part of an overall pattern.  Also, no one’s death is “inevitable” on TV- writers can craft a story line any way they so choose.  

alllovelost13:

fanaticalqueergeek:

So, after last night’s bombshell on Once Upon a Time, that Mulan had feelings for Aurora, I’ve seen a disturbing trend in the comments about the show:
"Why does Mulan have to be gay?"
"OUAT is ruining my favorite character by making her gaaaaay!"
and, my personal favorite:
"Why does EVERY SINGLE SHOW have to have gay characters in it?”
The first two questions are clearly people’s personal opinons, and they are allowed to have them. Of course, Mulan has not said how she identifies, and she could very well be bisexual, but no one seems to be able to grasp that concept. But really, it’s the last one that really annoys the hell out of me.
Because let’s be real- queer characters are NOT on every single show. Not by a long shot.  In fact, GLAAD just released the numbers.
On scripted shows, only 3.3 percent of the regular characters are LGBT.
Let that sink in.
3.3 percent. 
For every 100 characters, only 3 are LGBT.
Now tell me how every single show has a gay character on it.  
Because all it does it make you sound like a bigot. Because the bigger question is- WHY does it matter if every show has a gay character in it? Who cares? Diversity on television shows let kids and teens all over the country realize that Yes, someone is like THEM.  Last time I checked, the United States was not made up 100% of white, straight men. 
So check your damn privilege. 

A few good points made. However…

First off, any person with common sense would understand that sarcasm is heavily implied in the comment “EVERY SINGLE SHOW.” Why? Because it would be near impossible for any normal human being to literally watch EVERY SINGLE SHOW out there. There are hundreds and hundreds of them. Obviously the person who made that comment was using “every single show” as a figure of speech.

Furthermore, that person may only watch a few shows on a regular basis and all the shows they watch may just have happened to have gay characters in them. So for that particular person, the statement may be true enough. But that also doesn’t mean that they hate gay characters and that there shouldn’t be any on TV. It could simply mean they are frustrated with the amount of gay characters in their favorite shows. Why?

Well that takes us to the comments on relating to characters. It was a good point but you have to keep in mind that while gay characters on shows are good for GAY people to relate to, it is very difficult for straight people to relate to homosexual characters. I myself don’t mind and love to see gay characters on shows, but I cannot RELATE to them because I’m of a straight orientation. I could understand a straight someone being a little frustrated with their favorite shows BECAUSE there are gay characters they can’t RELATE to in them.

My question to you is… do you personally know the person who made that comment?

Probably not.

"Check your privilege" doesn’t work for anonymous one sentence comments online.

Simply put- you DON’T KNOW THEM. You have no prior knowledge of what that person is like and so should not have slathered that much “check your privilege” nonsense on such an insignificant and undeserving comment.

Bottom line here is that everyone in the world is different. We all have different backgrounds, experiences, thoughts, opinions, view points, and logic. Those are the things that make us who we are and influence what we say, how we say it, why we say it that way, and what we really MEAN when we say it.

What I’m saying is, you made yourself look like an ass for jumping on such a trivial comment and smackin’ stats in our faces when the comment never explicitly tied itself to fact. A comment is just that. A comment. Read it, have your own personal feelings and thoughts about it, and then MOVE ON.

Get off your high horse and cut the “check your privilege” crap because all it does is make you sound more haughty and privileged than the person you pounced on.

And no, I’m not telling you to check your privilege.  I’m saying you need to get your foot out of your mouth. Think about what you’re going to say before you take the time to say it. I’m so tired of everyone jumping on the “check your privilege” bandwagon when they have no idea what it really means and what really warrants a good “check it” rant.

Thank you for making my point for me about privilege.  You don’t want to see gay characters on a TV show because you can’t relate to them because you are straight? I get that. But in that same show, you have, on average, about 5 other straight characters who you CAN relate to. A gay person has that ONE person who identifies as gay, and as I stated, there are only 3.3% of them on TV.  So who has the privilege? You can focus on other characters or change the channel. What option does a gay person have to see themselves represented?  So yes, people who complain about the amount of gay people on TV when they can see themselves in 97% of ALL OTHER CHARACTERS need to check their privilege.  

alllovelost13:

fanaticalqueergeek:

So, after last night’s bombshell on Once Upon a Time, that Mulan had feelings for Aurora, I’ve seen a disturbing trend in the comments about the show:

"Why does Mulan have to be gay?"

"OUAT is ruining my favorite character by making her gaaaaay!"

and, my personal favorite:

"Why does EVERY SINGLE SHOW have to have gay characters in it?”

The first two questions are clearly people’s personal opinons, and they are allowed to have them. Of course, Mulan has not said how she identifies, and she could very well be bisexual, but no one seems to be able to grasp that concept. But really, it’s the last one that really annoys the hell out of me.

Because let’s be real- queer characters are NOT on every single show. Not by a long shot.  In fact, GLAAD just released the numbers.

On scripted shows, only 3.3 percent of the regular characters are LGBT.

Let that sink in.

3.3 percent. 

For every 100 characters, only 3 are LGBT.

Now tell me how every single show has a gay character on it.  

Because all it does it make you sound like a bigot. Because the bigger question is- WHY does it matter if every show has a gay character in it? Who cares? Diversity on television shows let kids and teens all over the country realize that Yes, someone is like THEM.  Last time I checked, the United States was not made up 100% of white, straight men. 

So check your damn privilege. 

A few good points made. However…

First off, any person with common sense would understand that sarcasm is heavily implied in the comment “EVERY SINGLE SHOW.” Why? Because it would be near impossible for any normal human being to literally watch EVERY SINGLE SHOW out there. There are hundreds and hundreds of them. Obviously the person who made that comment was using “every single show” as a figure of speech.

Furthermore, that person may only watch a few shows on a regular basis and all the shows they watch may just have happened to have gay characters in them. So for that particular person, the statement may be true enough. But that also doesn’t mean that they hate gay characters and that there shouldn’t be any on TV. It could simply mean they are frustrated with the amount of gay characters in their favorite shows. Why?

Well that takes us to the comments on relating to characters. It was a good point but you have to keep in mind that while gay characters on shows are good for GAY people to relate to, it is very difficult for straight people to relate to homosexual characters. I myself don’t mind and love to see gay characters on shows, but I cannot RELATE to them because I’m of a straight orientation. I could understand a straight someone being a little frustrated with their favorite shows BECAUSE there are gay characters they can’t RELATE to in them.

My question to you is… do you personally know the person who made that comment?

Probably not.

"Check your privilege" doesn’t work for anonymous one sentence comments online.

Simply put- you DON’T KNOW THEM. You have no prior knowledge of what that person is like and so should not have slathered that much “check your privilege” nonsense on such an insignificant and undeserving comment.

Bottom line here is that everyone in the world is different. We all have different backgrounds, experiences, thoughts, opinions, view points, and logic. Those are the things that make us who we are and influence what we say, how we say it, why we say it that way, and what we really MEAN when we say it.

What I’m saying is, you made yourself look like an ass for jumping on such a trivial comment and smackin’ stats in our faces when the comment never explicitly tied itself to fact. A comment is just that. A comment. Read it, have your own personal feelings and thoughts about it, and then MOVE ON.

Get off your high horse and cut the “check your privilege” crap because all it does is make you sound more haughty and privileged than the person you pounced on.

And no, I’m not telling you to check your privilege.  I’m saying you need to get your foot out of your mouth. Think about what you’re going to say before you take the time to say it. I’m so tired of everyone jumping on the “check your privilege” bandwagon when they have no idea what it really means and what really warrants a good “check it” rant.

Thank you for making my point for me about privilege.  You don’t want to see gay characters on a TV show because you can’t relate to them because you are straight? I get that. But in that same show, you have, on average, about 5 other straight characters who you CAN relate to. A gay person has that ONE person who identifies as gay, and as I stated, there are only 3.3% of them on TV.  So who has the privilege? You can focus on other characters or change the channel. What option does a gay person have to see themselves represented?  So yes, people who complain about the amount of gay people on TV when they can see themselves in 97% of ALL OTHER CHARACTERS need to check their privilege.  

You were red. You liked me cause I was blue. You touched me and suddenly I was a lilac sky and you decided purple just wasn’t for you.
i read this 12 times  (via )
P sure Lauren didn't actually want to leave, I think I remember an interview with Derek Hass he said they chose which character would die
Anonymous

It doesn’t actually matter to me if the actress wanted to leave the show. There are better and more creative ways to write off a character. It’s just lazy to kill them off.

Lauren German wanted to leave Chicago Fire. Get over it
Anonymous

I have seen the light! Thank you, Anonymous Tumblr user! You have made me see the error of my ways!

Or… not. 

Killing Off The Queers

Dead Lesbian Syndrome. Bury Your Gays.  This trope has a few names, and although I like to think it was fading, this 2014-2015 TV season have proven me oh so wrong.  We have had no fewer than 3 queer female characters be killed off in 3 weeks. Let me repeat that- THREE queer women in THREE weeks. That’s bordering on ridiculous. Of course, that’s almost as bad as killing off 9 queer women in 2013 TV season alone. 

This is not a case of “They are being treated like every other character.”  I would accept that, if we had enough queer women on TV to have a fair sample, but we don’t.  The GLAAD “Where are we on TV” report just came out, and we are almost exactly where we were last year.  3.8% of scripted characters on TV are LGBTQ. This means that way more of a percentage of gays got killed off than the typical straight white male.  This is not equal representation. This is quite literally, “Bury Your Gays” (with a mix of Fridging.)  And it needs to stop.   

The excuses behind these characters deaths are also trite and hard to swallow. 

Isabelle Hartley (Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D):  Isabelle was killed off during the season premiere (where she was also introduced!) Her sexuality was never discussed on the show, ever though in the comics she is canonically queer.  Then she was killed off.  THEN the writers gave an interview stating they didn’t talk about her sexuality because they “Would’ve been known as the people who killed off two lesbians on a show.”  

Well, that makes me feel SO much better. Not mentioning her sexuality does not make her automatically straight. Beyond the fact that indicates that “hetero” should be the default sexuality, tons of fans of the show know that in the comics, she WAS gay. Not saying it doesn’t make it so. 

Leslie Shay (Chicago Fire): Leslie was killed off in the first episode of the season.   The writers admitted that it was to further the storyline of everyone else- basically saying she was way less important then everyone else. If killing someone is the only way to further someone’s character development, that’s just plan bad writing. 

Sara Lance (Arrow):  Sara, knows as the Black Canary, was also killed off during the season premiere.  Are we sensing a theme here?  The writers claim it was to further a storyline, but it also sets the stage for her sister, Laurel, to take the mantle of Black Canary (as she is in the comics.) 

I’m all for Laurel being the Black Canary, but did they really have to kill off her sister to do it? Is there some unwritten rule that two women can’t be superheroes at the same time? Would the world end or be sucked into a black hole?  They already have both Oliver and Roy as two of the heroes on the show. Could Sara not have trained Laurel?  Once again, it’s terrible writing. There could have been 100 other ways to have done this that would have been less cliché and painful for the LGBTQ community. 

It’s already hard enough to find myself in TV characters (we won’t even get into the lack of Butch representation,) but to give all the queer kids out there a sliver of hope  and then take it away? Not cool. How many queer kids are watching these shows thinking “Look, they are just like me!” only to watch them get brutally killed? This just reinforces the stereotype that queers don’t deserve happy endings, especially when there are SO FEW of them already on TV. 

Well, you know what? We do deserve happy endings, and good story lines, and to be more than a way to further some straight person’s character development. And it’s time for TV to start reflecting that. 

batsonthebrain:

Thank you Arrow, for telling your queer fans that they don’t get heroes.

Thank you Arrow, for telling your female fans that people who don’t tolerate injustice against women aren’t important.

Thank you Arrow, for telling everyone that they’re always replaceable, even when the replacement might not be able to do the job.

Thank you Arrow, for killing another female character, because you couldn’t find a better way.

Thank you Arrow, for clearing up my Wednesday night.

One of the challenges of extended singleness that’s not often discussed is the idea that you are no one’s special person. I realise, even as I write, that this seems glaringly obvious. But there is a subtlety to this idea that I’ve not seen explored in the singleness discussions that I’ve encountered. There can be a loneliness to being alone, sure. That much is obvious. But there is a unique, entirely other kind of loneliness to being alone when everyone around you has their one person – that person who is their responsibility, their care, their focus. It’s the one they check in with, the one whose opinion they will defer to, the one whose schedule they will shape their lives around. It is lonely to have nobody, but it is another kind of loneliness to be nobody’s somebody. As nobody’s somebody, you become the dispensable variable in relational equations. It is you who might have to change your intended meetup time to fit better with what your girlfriend’s boyfriend wants. Your sister might need to pause in the middle of a deep and meaningful conversation with you to take a call from her husband at work. Your plans with a friend will fall through because her toddler is teething. If you don’t know your guy friend’s new love interest, chances are you won’t know your guy friend for much longer, either. You will grow accustomed to being the third person, or fifth, or seventh in gatherings where all the other attendees are pairs. All of this is good and fine. It’s healthy, even. It’s sanctifying and humanising to be reminded that our own needs are not paramount. It is good to be adaptable, and to learn to hold things loosely. It’s good to know that others’ lives don’t carry the same freedoms that singleness does. But that doesn’t mean it won’t hurt to be reminded that everybody you care about most is aligning their lives closely to another person’s, moulding their days and hours and moments to fit another’s, but that person is not you. You are loved by many but not at the top of anyone’s priority list.