{ May 2nd }

googleberry replied to your post:

Is cissexism people being all CISSCUM?

“the belief that transsexuals’ identified genders are inferior to, or less authentic than, those of cissexuals.”[11]

this is me talking from very little experience in discussing cis/transgender related topics, though, so I’d ask Snowy if you want more detail or clarification…

4 notes
{ 9:56 pm }

googleberry replied to your post: How did your dorm get water damage?

You should talk to a CA or something, ‘cause it’s too close to finals for the, to be pulling this shit. A couple years ago at SCAD during finals, somebody hit a sprinkler with a football, made the whole system go off, everybody’s stuff that was  ruined. They made an appeal, and a lotta people got extensions.

well it’s not like anybody planned the flooding, it was completely unintentional

i’ve talked to my french professor and she understands, but idk i’ll talk to some others and see if they can give me a few deadline changes

some of my floormates are thinking about planning to sue (idk who) and i think they invited me in on it but idk i just want to get this year over with at this point

but yeah i’m not looking forward to getting used to a new dorm building when i was just now getting used to this one that i’ve been living in for eight months. my new place is like a weird smelly hotel and i’ve heard you start to reek of weed and cockroaches if you stay too long.

1 note
{ April 14th }

THIS IS ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL

6 notes
{ April 12th }

googleberry replied to your post: OH WOW U-UM HELLO god both of you guys’ art…

ISAIA IS FOLLOWING YOU WHAT. I mean, you totally are worthy of them, but AHH. IT’S STILL SO COOL!

YEAH IDK HOW IT HAPPENED EITHER

I’m gonna have to pretend to be quality for a few weeks long enough to lull people into a false sense of security

and then BAM CRAPPY TEXT POSTS AND CRACKISH HUMOR AGAIN

{ April 9th }
oh dear okay I’m by no means the best person to explain this but I’m going to try my best basically the big problem I have with her female characters is that, through them, Rowling really tried to make the reader frown upon femininity in her books Hermione Granger: I love Hermione, I do, but in the books she’s partially portrayed as a Smart Girl because she can ~turn her back~ on stupid things like boys! and shopping! and clothing! because only stupid shallow girls like those things! (that said, I understand Hermione is legitimately smart and I’m not trying to list this as a fault of hers, but more of how she’s been portrayed.) Lavender Brown: giggly, gossipy, only interested in “girl things,” therefore trite and stupid and silly and Hermione has to be the big bold masculine woman that steps up to her and puts her in her place for daring to lay a hand on her man. never any redemption. Cho Chang: portrayed as silly and ridiculous for crying and — God forbid — having emotions over her boyfriend’s death and Harry’s insensitivity. never any redemption. Fleur Delacour: the reader is basically supposed to hate her for being beautiful (partial redemption? at the end of book 6 when she stands up to Molly Weasley, so yay, that was nice) Bellatrix Black: killed by Molly Weasley as if to prove a point that maternal love is better than sexual love. that may be a stretch, but she still isn’t given much characterization beyond Bad Lady. Dolores Umbridge: raped by centaurs. and then laughed at. Ginny Weasley: was fucking possessed by Voldemort, which we forget about until it’s conveniently brought up in time for her to be seen in book 6 as Harry’s love interest. she deserved more backstory, more development — I don’t even like her but she just deserved more. Petunia Evans: did shitty things, but Snape did similar ones and we’re supposed to forgive him…? Pansy Parkinson: JKR apparently designed her to project the images of the girls that bullied her as a child or something. idk, you’re free to dislike your own characters, but basically set Pansy up to be this one-dimensional projection with no depth or motivation other than being Nasty. plus there’s that whole quote she said: “I’ve got two daughters who will have to make their way in this skinny-obsessed world, and it worries me, because I don’t want them to be empty-headed, self-obsessed, emaciated clones; I’d rather they were independent, interesting, idealistic, kind, opinionated, original, funny – a thousand things, before ‘thin’. And frankly, I’d rather they didn’t give a gust of stinking chihuahua flatulence whether the woman standing next to them has fleshier knees than they do. Let my girls be Hermiones, rather than Pansy Parkinsons. Let them never be Stupid Girls.” Like it’s fantastic that she wants her children to be all of these great things, she wants them to think for themselves and read and write and talk and communicate and learn… but there is nothing wrong with being skinny, with dating boys, with caring about your appearance — there is nothing wrong with being feminine. And the comments about girls’ weight just… piss me off. There are lots of reasons why smart girls can — and do — care about their weight, and it’s not just because ~oh someone else is thinner than me~. Am I making any sense? Again, I’m not the best person to explain this because I haven’t been studying it as long as some other people and I’m definitely no expert on feminism in pop culture and literature. But those are just some of my thoughts. And I mean, all that said, I do genuinely like the way she wrote characters like Hermione and Tonks and McGonagall. I do genuinely like most of the characters I’ve listed above, I like how she wasn’t afraid to take risks with some of her female characters, and I like how they paid off. I just find this anti-femininity aspect of the books problematic. (But let me clarify in case people want to jump on me for being too critical against the books: yes, I do genuinely love the Harry Potter series. I love its characters and I love its world-building and I love its fantastic storytelling and bright, brilliant imagination — I just realize that it has flaws, and this is one of the big ones I can’t ignore.)

oh dear okay

I’m by no means the best person to explain this but I’m going to try my best

basically the big problem I have with her female characters is that, through them, Rowling really tried to make the reader frown upon femininity in her books

  • Hermione Granger: I love Hermione, I do, but in the books she’s partially portrayed as a Smart Girl because she can ~turn her back~ on stupid things like boys! and shopping! and clothing! because only stupid shallow girls like those things! (that said, I understand Hermione is legitimately smart and I’m not trying to list this as a fault of hers, but more of how she’s been portrayed.)
  • Lavender Brown: giggly, gossipy, only interested in “girl things,” therefore trite and stupid and silly and Hermione has to be the big bold masculine woman that steps up to her and puts her in her place for daring to lay a hand on her man. never any redemption.
  • Cho Chang: portrayed as silly and ridiculous for crying and — God forbid — having emotions over her boyfriend’s death and Harry’s insensitivity. never any redemption.
  • Fleur Delacour: the reader is basically supposed to hate her for being beautiful (partial redemption? at the end of book 6 when she stands up to Molly Weasley, so yay, that was nice)
  • Bellatrix Black: killed by Molly Weasley as if to prove a point that maternal love is better than sexual love. that may be a stretch, but she still isn’t given much characterization beyond Bad Lady.
  • Dolores Umbridge: raped by centaurs. and then laughed at.
  • Ginny Weasley: was fucking possessed by Voldemort, which we forget about until it’s conveniently brought up in time for her to be seen in book 6 as Harry’s love interest. she deserved more backstory, more development — I don’t even like her but she just deserved more.
  • Petunia Evans: did shitty things, but Snape did similar ones and we’re supposed to forgive him…?
  • Pansy Parkinson: JKR apparently designed her to project the images of the girls that bullied her as a child or something. idk, you’re free to dislike your own characters, but basically set Pansy up to be this one-dimensional projection with no depth or motivation other than being Nasty.

plus there’s that whole quote she said:

“I’ve got two daughters who will have to make their way in this skinny-obsessed world, and it worries me, because I don’t want them to be empty-headed, self-obsessed, emaciated clones; I’d rather they were independent, interesting, idealistic, kind, opinionated, original, funny – a thousand things, before ‘thin’. And frankly, I’d rather they didn’t give a gust of stinking chihuahua flatulence whether the woman standing next to them has fleshier knees than they do. Let my girls be Hermiones, rather than Pansy Parkinsons. Let them never be Stupid Girls.”

Like it’s fantastic that she wants her children to be all of these great things, she wants them to think for themselves and read and write and talk and communicate and learn… but there is nothing wrong with being skinny, with dating boys, with caring about your appearance — there is nothing wrong with being feminine. And the comments about girls’ weight just… piss me off. There are lots of reasons why smart girls can — and do — care about their weight, and it’s not just because ~oh someone else is thinner than me~.

Am I making any sense? Again, I’m not the best person to explain this because I haven’t been studying it as long as some other people and I’m definitely no expert on feminism in pop culture and literature. But those are just some of my thoughts.

And I mean, all that said, I do genuinely like the way she wrote characters like Hermione and Tonks and McGonagall. I do genuinely like most of the characters I’ve listed above, I like how she wasn’t afraid to take risks with some of her female characters, and I like how they paid off. I just find this anti-femininity aspect of the books problematic.

(But let me clarify in case people want to jump on me for being too critical against the books: yes, I do genuinely love the Harry Potter series. I love its characters and I love its world-building and I love its fantastic storytelling and bright, brilliant imagination — I just realize that it has flaws, and this is one of the big ones I can’t ignore.)

22 notes
{ April 4th }
googleberry asked: Okay, so this person who interned at Nick on Spongebob came back to school and gave a talk. She was there the day that the Korra trailer got leaked. When she went into the break room, Brian was there angrily buttering a bagel. Can you imagine? Angrily. Buttering. A bagel. Poor thing. What have we done to him?

meggannn:

(Leaked trailer? …Do you mean the opening?)

Awww man I want to feel bad but that is actually kind of funny. Can you imagine him muttering to himself grumpily as he bitterly butters his bagel?

ahh, remember when…

32 notes
{ March 15th }
The FB page is getting about 1K likes every six hours. It was at 83K last time I checked. How do you feel about possibly seeing LoK in nine days?
◥
googleberry ASKED

I’m willing to wait another month (at least we have a date to shoot for instead of fumbling around in the dark) but ten days wouldn’t be too bad. I’m okay if it comes out then and okay if it doesn’t. I’ve been whining for a release date for so long, now that I have it, I’m content. Of course if they decide to release more official content or behind-the-scenes teasers as some sort of advertisement, that’d be great, but I’m fine either way.

That said, if it comes out, I’ll definitely watch it and tag with “korra spoilers” and/or put cuts on my posts for things. Aaaand then I’ll end up watching it again when it airs on tv, of course, haha.

3 notes
{ February 19th }

googleberry:

meggannn:

googleberry replied to your photo:

That is Actually really great timing, yo. So. I could buy them seperately, after I found the table. And I did. And I read them. And wow.

Oh, you finished? What’d you think?

It’s definitely a great series. I love how realistic the characters’ choices are and how imperfect things are and how you can feel Katniss descending rightfully into insanity, blah blah blah things. The end, though… I dunno. The whole Prim thing seemed too convenient. And Peeta is just BOOM recovered. what even is that. They say he is changed forever and then he just isn’t… What. I guess the very end seems too scarily realistic to me. Katniss is forever disconnected from even her children, calling them the boy and the girl, and she only had them because Peeta wanted them. (It’s really weird how perfect the two kids are, each with a Seam and a merchant feature.) Both Katniss and Peeta will forever be haunted with nightmares… It just seems kind of hopeless to me… Obviously most of the victors suffer from PTSD. The flashbacks/nightmares, the constant dwelling and inability to escape it, the jumpiness. That has GOT to suck for the kids, growing up with constantly-triggered parents, since it seems that the nightmares still happen every night after 20 years.At least with the book and stuff they’re trying to heal. It bothers me a bit that Katniss couldn’t see that painting was Peeta’s way of trying to heal, to piece together his story and make sense of it. He really just gets the short end of the stick all the time. I don’t understand why Katniss originally agreed to put the Capitol kids in the Hunger Games. That part really bugs me. Throughout the entire series it’s like a battle to see people as people and see them as a giant faceless group. When people are human beings, they get her empathy;when they’re just sort of a faceless group, it turns into an us versus them situation. I guess that’s what it boils down to in war and when you are just trying to survive, but it’s frightening how true it is for anybody at anytime. Like when Flavius, Octavia, and Venia finally realize that Katniss is a human being who suffers and they cry at the thought of her not being alive anymore. But even in real life, y’know? Like if we hear that 10,000 people died, it’s just sort of. Eh. But when one person dies and you get to see their spouse try to be strong for the kids and break down, hear about the dog who won’t stop waiting by the door hoping they will come home, the individual-oriented things that make a person human… It’s rather tear-inducing. I didn’t cry at all until Buttercup and Katniss comforted one another in Prim’s absence. I guess all the other stuff happened too quickly or was too senseless to really feel. That ugly cat guarding Katniss in the night just like he used to do with Prim just set the tear guns a-tricklin’. Hmm. Maybe that was the only relationship that got mended in all of the tragedy and it was sort of beautiful in that grieving-creatures-brought-together kind of way. Mr. Everdeen never got named, did he? He was just ‘my father’ and his relationship to Katniss was never spoiled or anything like everybody elses. Blarghrghrgh. Mishmash of things in mah head. Bumblejumble.

Oooh but Peeta definitely didn’t recover, though: the hijacking stuck with him for the rest of his life. Both of them suffering through PTSD and being back in D12 must’ve been rough but I think being there together was helpful for the both of them.

For the epilogue, I don’t think Katniss herself is completely “disconnected,” it’s just more of a reflective piece for Collins to detach herself from the story to look back on it as a whole and see the affects the war had on everybody. For the series she’s stuck in Katniss’s limited pov, and even though the epilogue is still in first-person, this “detachment” is more supposed to reflect on the finality of the series, not Katniss’s actual feelings towards her family. (Also everybody also says how upset they are that they have kids just because Peeta wanted them — but I hardly doubt she would’ve said yes to raising a family if she hadn’t wanted them herself. She said it took fifteen years until she agreed, so it’s not like Peeta was forcing them on her.)

Katniss agreed to have that final Hunger Games solely to make Coin think that she was on her side. Coin wanted the last Games and remember, Katniss said she agreed to it “for Prim.” But Prim never would’ve wanted that, and we know that — that’s our first clue. Katniss was just trying to get closer Coin so she could kill her. As for that last Games, whatever happened to the decision… I have no idea.

The Buttercup scene was really what made all of the deaths real to a lot of the readers (myself included), and I think that’s what it was supposed to do. Until that point Katniss had been… kind of out of it. All of the deaths were told very abruptly, directly, in such a matter-of-fact manner that they didn’t always seem real. All of the fights were happening so fast (as they do in war) that it’s hard to understand who’s gone and what exactly happened to them until the reflection in the aftermath. I think a lot of people complained about the similar problems they had with Remus Lupin’s and Nymphadora Tonks’s deaths in Harry Potter: they weren’t given enough time, screen time, emotional depth, etcetc. But for the sake of realism, I really don’t think it’s necessary to have every character death be some big, mournful thing. The Buttercup scene is there to tell us, yes, that really happened, and the pain, struggles, and tears are all real. Making the memorial book is them beginning to heal (and Katniss finally appreciates Peeta’s artistic skills as they help the both of them recover).

but yeah. yaaaaaaaaaaaay~

5 notes
{ 2:50 pm }

googleberry replied to your photo: ughhhh this is the entire point of the series and…

That is Actually really great timing, yo. So. I could buy them seperately, after I found the table. And I did. And I read them. And wow.

Oh, you finished? What’d you think?

5 notes