🔥 Popular | Latest

what-the-fandomm: 2sunchild2: kukumomoart: chancethereaper: aglassroseneverfades: pmastamonkmonk: schnerp: feminism-is-radical: auntiewanda: brithwyr: auntiewanda: brithwyr: auntiewanda: houroftheanarchistwolf: aawb: starsapphire: is it time for frank cho and milo manara to die or what That’s basically a naked woman I’m YELLING What a pervert. What the FUCK does he not know how clothes work? What the hypothetical fuck is she wearing then if we can see all that? It’s like how bath towels in comics miraculously wrap completely around breasts. Or how even when injured and dead on the ground women in comics have to be twisted into “sexy” poses. Or how women in comics walk like they’re in high heels even barefoot.  It’s the only way men know how to draw women, because to them female characters are only there to be sexy. They only think of “women” as exploitative costumes and camera angles, high heels and titillation. Sex objects to ogle, plot objects to further male heroes’ narratives and drama, not heroes to cheer for.  I’m sorry, I was labouring under the impression that this was the crowd that thought women should wear what they want..? And that applies to fictional women who are depicted by men how? You can’t apply agency in the plot to something metatextual when it comes to fictional characters.  Come on, let’s not pretend this is a male exclusive thing. We’re going to have this argument are we? Not to mention you’re deviating from the original point that attributing agency to fictional characters’ clothing is asinine.  What you have here are images of power, and do you really believe these characters are designed with titillating heterosexual women and bisexual and homosexual men in mind? Because I don’t think you do. This is why the Hawkeye Initiative exists. Take common female poses in comics, put a man in the role, and see how “empowering” and “strong” it actually looks:  Also:  He got the painting for fighting against ‘censorship.’ Note that they handed him a gross design of a female being objectified, because at the end of the day, that is all they really want, to be allowed to objectify women. They don’t care about censorship in general it is about their ability to sexualise and degrade women without consequence. You can see her butthole for chrissakes I think the best imagery I’ve seen to explain the difference between what men think male objectification is vs what women actually want to see is the Hugh Jackman magazine covers. Hugh Jackman on a men’s magazine. He’s shirtless and buff and angry. He’s imposing and aggressive. This is a male power fantasy, it’s what men want to be and aspire to - intense masculinity. Hugh Jackman on a women’s magazine.  He looks like a dad. He looks like he’s going to bake me a quiche and sit and watch Game of Thrones with me. He looks like he gives really good hugs. Men think women want big hulking naked men in loin cloths which is why they always quote He-Man as male objectification - without realizing that He Man is naked and buff in a loin cloth because MEN WANT HIM TO BE. More women would be happy to see him in a pink apron cutting vegetables and singing off-key to 70s rock. Men want objects. Women want PEOPLE. This is the first time I have EVER seen this false equivalence articulated so well. Thank you. bro you can literally see every fold of her pussy that just isn’t how fabric works Lol body painting literally Clothes don’t suction themselves around tiddies.If that was the case I’d be wearing hoodies all year i mean there is dangerous objectification for male characters, but it’s not prevalent in written or drawn sources because that doesn’t harm the person and therefore isn’t relevant. it’s only something to bring into the conversation when you’re talking about how it affects the actors.male actors are sometimes forced to starve for days so that they can get scenes where their muscles are stood out (there’s a really good post with article links about this i’ll try to find it), but these drawings don’t affect an actual personit’s a completely different subjectand i mean for god’s sake you can’t counter the fact that someone deliberately drew her with her coochie out with some bullshit about how male characters are hyper-masculine in a glorified way: Frank Cho added 2 new photos with Frank D Cho. 2 hrs Well, this just happened. Milo Manara, master artist and storyteller, came in at the last ten minutes of my Art and Women panel and handed me a special gift in appreciation for fighting censorship- an original watercolor painting of Spider-Woman. The packed auditorium went wild. Wow. I'm just speechless CHO! NERT SE prasLE THE caMERa 2G CRap! IG a stock N HEET CRP SERNG P 1RT ENTM FR MA RA what-the-fandomm: 2sunchild2: kukumomoart: chancethereaper: aglassroseneverfades: pmastamonkmonk: schnerp: feminism-is-radical: auntiewanda: brithwyr: auntiewanda: brithwyr: auntiewanda: houroftheanarchistwolf: aawb: starsapphire: is it time for frank cho and milo manara to die or what That’s basically a naked woman I’m YELLING What a pervert. What the FUCK does he not know how clothes work? What the hypothetical fuck is she wearing then if we can see all that? It’s like how bath towels in comics miraculously wrap completely around breasts. Or how even when injured and dead on the ground women in comics have to be twisted into “sexy” poses. Or how women in comics walk like they’re in high heels even barefoot.  It’s the only way men know how to draw women, because to them female characters are only there to be sexy. They only think of “women” as exploitative costumes and camera angles, high heels and titillation. Sex objects to ogle, plot objects to further male heroes’ narratives and drama, not heroes to cheer for.  I’m sorry, I was labouring under the impression that this was the crowd that thought women should wear what they want..? And that applies to fictional women who are depicted by men how? You can’t apply agency in the plot to something metatextual when it comes to fictional characters.  Come on, let’s not pretend this is a male exclusive thing. We’re going to have this argument are we? Not to mention you’re deviating from the original point that attributing agency to fictional characters’ clothing is asinine.  What you have here are images of power, and do you really believe these characters are designed with titillating heterosexual women and bisexual and homosexual men in mind? Because I don’t think you do. This is why the Hawkeye Initiative exists. Take common female poses in comics, put a man in the role, and see how “empowering” and “strong” it actually looks:  Also:  He got the painting for fighting against ‘censorship.’ Note that they handed him a gross design of a female being objectified, because at the end of the day, that is all they really want, to be allowed to objectify women. They don’t care about censorship in general it is about their ability to sexualise and degrade women without consequence. You can see her butthole for chrissakes I think the best imagery I’ve seen to explain the difference between what men think male objectification is vs what women actually want to see is the Hugh Jackman magazine covers. Hugh Jackman on a men’s magazine. He’s shirtless and buff and angry. He’s imposing and aggressive. This is a male power fantasy, it’s what men want to be and aspire to - intense masculinity. Hugh Jackman on a women’s magazine.  He looks like a dad. He looks like he’s going to bake me a quiche and sit and watch Game of Thrones with me. He looks like he gives really good hugs. Men think women want big hulking naked men in loin cloths which is why they always quote He-Man as male objectification - without realizing that He Man is naked and buff in a loin cloth because MEN WANT HIM TO BE. More women would be happy to see him in a pink apron cutting vegetables and singing off-key to 70s rock. Men want objects. Women want PEOPLE. This is the first time I have EVER seen this false equivalence articulated so well. Thank you. bro you can literally see every fold of her pussy that just isn’t how fabric works Lol body painting literally Clothes don’t suction themselves around tiddies.If that was the case I’d be wearing hoodies all year i mean there is dangerous objectification for male characters, but it’s not prevalent in written or drawn sources because that doesn’t harm the person and therefore isn’t relevant. it’s only something to bring into the conversation when you’re talking about how it affects the actors.male actors are sometimes forced to starve for days so that they can get scenes where their muscles are stood out (there’s a really good post with article links about this i’ll try to find it), but these drawings don’t affect an actual personit’s a completely different subjectand i mean for god’s sake you can’t counter the fact that someone deliberately drew her with her coochie out with some bullshit about how male characters are hyper-masculine in a glorified way
Save
thewickedverkaiking: aglassroseneverfades: pmastamonkmonk: schnerp: feminism-is-radical: auntiewanda: brithwyr: auntiewanda: brithwyr: auntiewanda: houroftheanarchistwolf: aawb: starsapphire: is it time for frank cho and milo manara to die or what That’s basically a naked woman I’m YELLING What a pervert. What the FUCK does he not know how clothes work? What the hypothetical fuck is she wearing then if we can see all that? It’s like how bath towels in comics miraculously wrap completely around breasts. Or how even when injured and dead on the ground women in comics have to be twisted into “sexy” poses. Or how women in comics walk like they’re in high heels even barefoot.  It’s the only way men know how to draw women, because to them female characters are only there to be sexy. They only think of “women” as exploitative costumes and camera angles, high heels and titillation. Sex objects to ogle, plot objects to further male heroes’ narratives and drama, not heroes to cheer for.  I’m sorry, I was labouring under the impression that this was the crowd that thought women should wear what they want..? And that applies to fictional women who are depicted by men how? You can’t apply agency in the plot to something metatextual when it comes to fictional characters.  Come on, let’s not pretend this is a male exclusive thing. We’re going to have this argument are we? Not to mention you’re deviating from the original point that attributing agency to fictional characters’ clothing is asinine.  What you have here are images of power, and do you really believe these characters are designed with titillating heterosexual women and bisexual and homosexual men in mind? Because I don’t think you do. This is why the Hawkeye Initiative exists. Take common female poses in comics, put a man in the role, and see how “empowering” and “strong” it actually looks:  Also:  He got the painting for fighting against ‘censorship.’ Note that they handed him a gross design of a female being objectified, because at the end of the day, that is all they really want, to be allowed to objectify women. They don’t care about censorship in general it is about their ability to sexualise and degrade women without consequence. You can see her butthole for chrissakes I think the best imagery I’ve seen to explain the difference between what men think male objectification is vs what women actually want to see is the Hugh Jackman magazine covers. Hugh Jackman on a men’s magazine. He’s shirtless and buff and angry. He’s imposing and aggressive. This is a male power fantasy, it’s what men want to be and aspire to - intense masculinity. Hugh Jackman on a women’s magazine.  He looks like a dad. He looks like he’s going to bake me a quiche and sit and watch Game of Thrones with me. He looks like he gives really good hugs. Men think women want big hulking naked men in loin cloths which is why they always quote He-Man as male objectification - without realizing that He Man is naked and buff in a loin cloth because MEN WANT HIM TO BE. More women would be happy to see him in a pink apron cutting vegetables and singing off-key to 70s rock. Men want objects. Women want PEOPLE. This is the first time I have EVER seen this false equivalence articulated so well. Thank you. MEN WANT OBJECTS WOMEN WANT PEOPLE : Frank Cho added 2 new photos with Frank D Cho. 2 hrs Well, this just happened. Milo Manara, master artist and storyteller, came in at the last ten minutes of my Art and Women panel and handed me a special gift in appreciation for fighting censorship- an original watercolor painting of Spider-Woman. The packed auditorium went wild. Wow. I'm just speechless CHO! NERT SE prasLE THE caMERa 2G CRap! IG a stock N HEET CRP SERNG P 1RT ENTM FR MA RA thewickedverkaiking: aglassroseneverfades: pmastamonkmonk: schnerp: feminism-is-radical: auntiewanda: brithwyr: auntiewanda: brithwyr: auntiewanda: houroftheanarchistwolf: aawb: starsapphire: is it time for frank cho and milo manara to die or what That’s basically a naked woman I’m YELLING What a pervert. What the FUCK does he not know how clothes work? What the hypothetical fuck is she wearing then if we can see all that? It’s like how bath towels in comics miraculously wrap completely around breasts. Or how even when injured and dead on the ground women in comics have to be twisted into “sexy” poses. Or how women in comics walk like they’re in high heels even barefoot.  It’s the only way men know how to draw women, because to them female characters are only there to be sexy. They only think of “women” as exploitative costumes and camera angles, high heels and titillation. Sex objects to ogle, plot objects to further male heroes’ narratives and drama, not heroes to cheer for.  I’m sorry, I was labouring under the impression that this was the crowd that thought women should wear what they want..? And that applies to fictional women who are depicted by men how? You can’t apply agency in the plot to something metatextual when it comes to fictional characters.  Come on, let’s not pretend this is a male exclusive thing. We’re going to have this argument are we? Not to mention you’re deviating from the original point that attributing agency to fictional characters’ clothing is asinine.  What you have here are images of power, and do you really believe these characters are designed with titillating heterosexual women and bisexual and homosexual men in mind? Because I don’t think you do. This is why the Hawkeye Initiative exists. Take common female poses in comics, put a man in the role, and see how “empowering” and “strong” it actually looks:  Also:  He got the painting for fighting against ‘censorship.’ Note that they handed him a gross design of a female being objectified, because at the end of the day, that is all they really want, to be allowed to objectify women. They don’t care about censorship in general it is about their ability to sexualise and degrade women without consequence. You can see her butthole for chrissakes I think the best imagery I’ve seen to explain the difference between what men think male objectification is vs what women actually want to see is the Hugh Jackman magazine covers. Hugh Jackman on a men’s magazine. He’s shirtless and buff and angry. He’s imposing and aggressive. This is a male power fantasy, it’s what men want to be and aspire to - intense masculinity. Hugh Jackman on a women’s magazine.  He looks like a dad. He looks like he’s going to bake me a quiche and sit and watch Game of Thrones with me. He looks like he gives really good hugs. Men think women want big hulking naked men in loin cloths which is why they always quote He-Man as male objectification - without realizing that He Man is naked and buff in a loin cloth because MEN WANT HIM TO BE. More women would be happy to see him in a pink apron cutting vegetables and singing off-key to 70s rock. Men want objects. Women want PEOPLE. This is the first time I have EVER seen this false equivalence articulated so well. Thank you. MEN WANT OBJECTS WOMEN WANT PEOPLE
Save
: biggest-gaudiest-patronuses In 5th grade some boys hid my desk in the boys bathroom. I was confused when I got to school and it was missing, so l just sat on the floor and read my book until the teacher came in and made them put it back. I realize now they were trying to trick me into go into the boys bathroom, but no one actually told me that's where my desk was, and it didn't occur to me to ask. Looking back I realize they had to make the effort to get to school early to move it, and I feel a tiny bit of regret for not reacting more biggest-gaudiest-patronuses In 3rd grade Richard brought his new lacrosse set in for show in tell. the ball went missing during class time and at the end of the day we all had to check our bookbags to look for it. I only glanced in mine (I just wanted to go home), but that evening I found it at the bottom of my bag. I was so scared of being blamed, I threw it into the neighbor's yard and never told anyone I found out 2 years later that my bully Luke put it there to frame me, and he was stil extremely frustrated I hadn't gotten caught. I'm pretty sure Richard got a new ball feral-renaissance-cat I had a crush on a boy I met in Kindergarten and made NO attempts to hide it because the people on TV were always telling each other when they liked each other. Didn't work as well as I'd hope (i.e. didn't work AT ALL and no boy wanted to hang out with me ever after that), but that's not the point Skip ahead to third grade. We had a new kid who was kind of a jerk. One day he asks me if I have a crush and I'm like, "Yeah, [Crushl And?" Dude turns around and yells to my crush "Hey! She has a crush on you!" My crush just kinda sighs and is like, "Yeah. I know. Everyone knows. Thanks." So this guy was hoping to embarrass me in front of everyone but it completely backfired because I lack the social filter necessary to feel ashamed of my base desires darkhumourandfandoms One time in like kindergerden some kid stole my shoe and instead if reacting I just went the whole day barefoot. No one questioned it He got bored of no reaction and just dropped the shoe but by then I was too committed and continued to walk around barefoot lycant-guy22 Some of yall grew up with a low base stat of "fucks given" biggest-gaudiest-patronuses damn right we did Source: biggest-gaudiest-patronuses
Save
The Zero Fucks Given crowd: biggest-gaudiest-patronuses In 5th grade some boys hid my desk in the boys bathroom. I was confused when I got to school and it was missing, so I just sat on the floor and read my book until the teacher came in and made them put it back I realize now they were trying to trick me into go into the boys bathroom, but no one actually told me that's where my desk was, and it didn't occur to me to ask Looking back I realize they had to make the effort to get to school early to move it, and I feel a tiny bit of regret for not reacting more. -biggest-gaudiest-patronuses In 3rd grade Richard brought his new lacrosse set in for show in tell. the ball went missing during class time and at the end of the day we all had to check our bookbags to look for it. I only glanced in mine (I just wanted to go home), but that evening I found it at the bottom of my bag. I was so scared of being blamed, I threw it into the neighbor's yard and never told anyone. I found out 2 years later that my bully Luke put it there to frame me, and he was still extremely frustrated I hadn't gotten caught. I'm pretty sure Richard got a new ball. feral-renaissance-cat I had a crush on a boy I met in Kindergarten and made NO attempts to hide it because the people on TV were always telling each other when they liked each other. Didn't work as well as I'd hope (i.e. didn't work AT ALL and no boy wanted to hang out with me ever after that), but that's not the point. Skip ahead to third grade. We had a new kid who was kind of a jerk. One day he asks me if I havea crush and I'm like, "Yeah, [Crush]. And?" Dude turns around and yells to my crush "Hey! She has a crush on you My crush just kinda sighs and is like, "Yeah. I know. Everyone knows. Thanks." So this guy was hoping to embarrass me in front of everyone but it completely backfired because I lack the social filter necessary to feel ashamed of my base desires. darkhumourandfandoms One time in like kindergerden some kid stole my shoe and instead if reacting I just went the whole day barefoot. No one questioned it. He got bored of no reaction and just dropped the shoe but by then I was too committed and continued to walk around barefoot. lycant-guy22 Some of yall grew up with a low base stat of "fucks given" The Zero Fucks Given crowd
Save
No fucks given: biggest-gaudiest-patronuses In 5th grade some boys hid my desk in the boys bathroom. I was confused when I got to school and it was missing, so I just sat on the floor and read my book until the teacher came in and made them put it back. I realize now they were trying to trick me into go into the boys bathroom, but no one actually told me that's where my desk was, and it didn't occur to me to ask Looking back I realize they had to make the effort to get to school early to move it, and l feel a tiny bit of regret for not reacting more biggest-gaudiest-patronuse:s In 3rd grade Richard brought his new lacrosse set in for show in tell. the ball went missing during class time and at the end of the day we all had to check our bookbags to look for it. I only glanced in mine (I just wanted to go home), but that evening I found it at the bottom of my bag. I was so scared of being blamed, I threw it into the neighbor's yard and never told anyone I found out 2 years later that my bully Luke put it there to frame me, and he was still extremely frustrated I hadn't gotten caught I'm pretty sure Richard got a new ball. feral-renaissance-cat I had a crush on a boy I met in Kindergarten and made NO attempts to hide it because the people on TV were always telling each other when they liked each other. Didn't work as well as I'd hope (i.e. didn't work AT ALL and no boy wanted to hang out with me ever after that) but that's not the point Skip ahead to third grade. We had a new kid who was kind of a jerk. One day he asks me if I have a crush and I'm like, "Yeah, [Crush] And?" Dude turns around and yells to my crush "Hey! She has a crush on you!" My crush just kinda sighs and is like, "Yeah. I know. Everyone knows. Thanks." So this guy was hoping to embarrass me in front of everyone but it completely backfired because I lack the social filter necessary to feel ashamed of my base desires darkhumourandfandoms One time in like kindergerden some kid stole my shoe and instead if reacting I just went the whole day barefoot. No one questioned it. He got bored of no reaction and just dropped the shoe but by then I was too committed and continued to walk around barefoot lycant-guy22 Some of yall grew up with a low base stat of "fucks given" biggest-gaudiest-patronuses damn right we did Source: biggest-gaudiest-patronuses No fucks given
Save
Barefoot: Anonymous 01/23/19(Wed)04:49:15 No.12460541 insisted on knowing why my three- chapter submission to a literary agent was rejected >his assistant finally responded telling me the book was "overly fetishistic and lacked any kind of nuance or relationship with reality" 7 KB PNG asked her if I could edit what l'd sent them and submit it again with minor changes no response How do you even appeal to literary agents in this day and age? l he entire industry seems so rgged against anvbody with any originality or capacity for sincere expression :Anonymous 01/23/19(Wed)06:04:43 No.12460726 >>12460704 # A novel from the perspective of a boy who is crushed in his father's concrete plant and turns into a paving stone. It is his journey from there into the city where he observes a great many things as he observes the changes in the area where he is laid along a stretch of pavement, e.g romances, break ups, quarrels, gentrification etc. He learns to deal with people dropping chewing gum and cigarette butts onto him, and struggles emotionally when the street becomes run-down and more heavy-footed unkind people trample over him day and night. The story ends on a positive note, as he is transported to a seafront and reset on the pavement adjoining a beach, where barefoot girls and so on walk on him instead, making him happier and turning him into a man, so to speak. >>12460735 # >>12460736 # >>12460748 # >>12460752 # >>12460760 # >>12460789 # >>12460960 # >>12461047 # >>12461111 # >>12461154 # >>12461186 # >>12461234 # >>12461271 # >>12461440 # >>12461492 # >>12461521 # >>12461537 # >>12461627
Save
<p><a href="http://bigguywithredhand.tumblr.com/post/176703393290/libertarirynn-this-scene-was-fucking" class="tumblr_blog">bigguywithredhand</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="https://libertarirynn.tumblr.com/post/176703110934/this-scene-was-fucking-horrific" class="tumblr_blog">libertarirynn</a>:</p> <blockquote><p>This scene was fucking horrific.</p></blockquote> <p>Barefoot Gen made me have conflicted opinions aboht my country</p></blockquote> <p>As well it should. Every conflict has more than one side. And it’s especially scary to think that the bombs we possess now make the ones we dropped on Japan look like firecrackers, not to mention the ones possessed by other countries. It’s kind of fascinating to know that mankind has reached a point where they could literally end the earth as we know it with a few buttons.</p>: <p><a href="http://bigguywithredhand.tumblr.com/post/176703393290/libertarirynn-this-scene-was-fucking" class="tumblr_blog">bigguywithredhand</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="https://libertarirynn.tumblr.com/post/176703110934/this-scene-was-fucking-horrific" class="tumblr_blog">libertarirynn</a>:</p> <blockquote><p>This scene was fucking horrific.</p></blockquote> <p>Barefoot Gen made me have conflicted opinions aboht my country</p></blockquote> <p>As well it should. Every conflict has more than one side. And it’s especially scary to think that the bombs we possess now make the ones we dropped on Japan look like firecrackers, not to mention the ones possessed by other countries. It’s kind of fascinating to know that mankind has reached a point where they could literally end the earth as we know it with a few buttons.</p>
Save