comment to be added.
friends only
(no subject)
I think one of my biggest pet peeves re this whole Monsoon issue is how people are surprised that Magnus kissed a woman since she's been 'straight' up until this point. That implies that sexuality is a solid, a constant, an unmoving, unevolving factor in one's personality. If you really study the psychology, in theory, of someone nearly three hundred years old, doesn't it make sense that sexuality would be a fluid factor? It changes with time, just like the seasons, or maybe it doesn't change at all. Maybe it's always there, always open, just waiting for each individual to come along and effect you. What I'm saying is, I can easily see Magnus being pansexual, but not defining herself by any sexual orientation whatsoever. She's probably dated abnormals, women, men, something in between... who knows. If she's so accepting of every type of creature, why wouldn't she be the same way sexually? I can't see her bothering with something so silly as a gender preference after her three lifetimes.
Of course, this is solely my opinion and personal bias of how I view her character. Feel free to discuss, disagree, whatever!
Of course, this is solely my opinion and personal bias of how I view her character. Feel free to discuss, disagree, whatever!
this is random
It hasn't bothered me in a while since no one generally talks about it anymore, but all of the sudden I see this argument pops up again and I finally feel the need to rant in public about it.
Sanctuary's season three episode "Hero 2: Broken Arrow" is the subject of a lot of criticisms. Whether you aren't a Kate fan, don't care for lighthearted Sanctuary episodes, or have deeper issues with the plot, I think a majority of fans didn't care for the episode. It's not my favorite, but there's certain elements of it that will make me watch it several more times over the course of my involvement in the show.
But there's one argument that really pisses me off. I guess you could say I'm a feminist, but I generally don't refer to myself as such because of the territory that comes with being a feminist. There's no gray areas. You're either not or you are, and I'm really not fond of such extremes. I'm a feminist, in that I support the empowerment of women with equal rights, not some ridiculous mantra that females are the greater sex and they should be elevated or the opinion is invalid. So, when the argument that Hero 2 is anti-feminist is brought into play, I'm left very pissed off.
Sanctuary is so good at giving the males and females of the show equal territory. The main cast is made up of two males and two females, and all of them are intelligent, useful, but flawed human beings. But one thing I do love that the show does is, for a change, the men are usually the "damsels in distress". They're generally not portrayed as weak, simply not always elevated like men in a man's world usually are. This gives the females a chance to come to their rescue, show off them general badassery skills and smarts.
In Hero 2, Kate is possessed by an abnormal that takes the form of a super hero suit. It's a cracky episode, that's the point. The suit isn't even possessing her, per se, but stripping her of her inhibitions. Technically, we're seeing a Kate that is very similar to how we met her before she joined the Sanctuary. Unrestricted, sexual, tough, clever, and selfish. Kate has control over her actions as much as someone who's drunk does. You do some things you probably wouldn't sober, and your judgment is clouded, but you aren't making these choices against your will.
As I mentioned earlier, the men of Sanctuary aren't always the alpha male types. They get in trouble, need saving, take off their shirts and sometimes even their pants. So when Kate is put in a leather catsuit with lowered inhibitions, suddenly we're making the anti-feminism argument? The episode is degrading to the character? How? She's not allowed to be sexy? Her friend isn't allowed to acknowledge that fact? The fact is, Kate IS sexy (opinions, of course, may vary on that). But she's sexy because she's smart, clever, sassy, savvy, bad ass, AND hot. Women being sexual should never be viewed as anti-feminism, in my opinion. If Kate was being portrayed as a hot girl stereotype in the show, it'd be different, but the writer's go out of their way to portray her as a strong woman who's also hot. Big, big difference.
Let's say it was Henry or Will who got the catsuit. Something tells me fandom wouldn't have a problem with the guy being the one with lowered inhibitions, kicking everyone's ass. It wouldn't be degrading to them, but just because it's a woman it makes it intolerable? I have to say I disagree with this 100%.
Another point that bugs me is, as I briefly touched up on, a few people in fandom have said Henry "sexually harassed" Kate by calling her hot. If Kate hadn't been in the suit... if Hank and Kate had been blowing up shit in the lab and he looked over and said she was hot... how would Kate react? Because that's the telling part. I highly doubt she'd be offended, angry, or even bothered by it. I think she'd grin at him with that sparkle in her eye. The fact that Henry would even say that to her out loud shows me they're at a proximity in their relationship, friendship, and partnership where they're comfortable enough to say things like that to each other.
Men are allowed to think women are hot. Women are allowed to think men are hot. That's not disrespectful, it's biology. It's disrespectful when either genders are pigs about it, and that's really all I'm going to say about that unless anyone would like me to elaborate on why I feel this way.
Interestingly enough, in season two, in the episode "Hero 1", I don't recall any feminists jumping on the scene when Will eye sexes Magnus after Walter reveals he has x-ray vision. And again, if Will or Henry were in a tight, leather suit, if Kate, Magnus, or any other woman commented on how hot they looked, would the same people calling accusations say the same thing? I can't say for sure, obviously, but most-likely not since the guys are dropping trou all the time on the show.
End rant. I hope I expressed my views clearly enough. Please feel free to discuss your thoughts on this with me. I'm always up for a good discussion!
Sanctuary's season three episode "Hero 2: Broken Arrow" is the subject of a lot of criticisms. Whether you aren't a Kate fan, don't care for lighthearted Sanctuary episodes, or have deeper issues with the plot, I think a majority of fans didn't care for the episode. It's not my favorite, but there's certain elements of it that will make me watch it several more times over the course of my involvement in the show.
But there's one argument that really pisses me off. I guess you could say I'm a feminist, but I generally don't refer to myself as such because of the territory that comes with being a feminist. There's no gray areas. You're either not or you are, and I'm really not fond of such extremes. I'm a feminist, in that I support the empowerment of women with equal rights, not some ridiculous mantra that females are the greater sex and they should be elevated or the opinion is invalid. So, when the argument that Hero 2 is anti-feminist is brought into play, I'm left very pissed off.
Sanctuary is so good at giving the males and females of the show equal territory. The main cast is made up of two males and two females, and all of them are intelligent, useful, but flawed human beings. But one thing I do love that the show does is, for a change, the men are usually the "damsels in distress". They're generally not portrayed as weak, simply not always elevated like men in a man's world usually are. This gives the females a chance to come to their rescue, show off them general badassery skills and smarts.
In Hero 2, Kate is possessed by an abnormal that takes the form of a super hero suit. It's a cracky episode, that's the point. The suit isn't even possessing her, per se, but stripping her of her inhibitions. Technically, we're seeing a Kate that is very similar to how we met her before she joined the Sanctuary. Unrestricted, sexual, tough, clever, and selfish. Kate has control over her actions as much as someone who's drunk does. You do some things you probably wouldn't sober, and your judgment is clouded, but you aren't making these choices against your will.
As I mentioned earlier, the men of Sanctuary aren't always the alpha male types. They get in trouble, need saving, take off their shirts and sometimes even their pants. So when Kate is put in a leather catsuit with lowered inhibitions, suddenly we're making the anti-feminism argument? The episode is degrading to the character? How? She's not allowed to be sexy? Her friend isn't allowed to acknowledge that fact? The fact is, Kate IS sexy (opinions, of course, may vary on that). But she's sexy because she's smart, clever, sassy, savvy, bad ass, AND hot. Women being sexual should never be viewed as anti-feminism, in my opinion. If Kate was being portrayed as a hot girl stereotype in the show, it'd be different, but the writer's go out of their way to portray her as a strong woman who's also hot. Big, big difference.
Let's say it was Henry or Will who got the catsuit. Something tells me fandom wouldn't have a problem with the guy being the one with lowered inhibitions, kicking everyone's ass. It wouldn't be degrading to them, but just because it's a woman it makes it intolerable? I have to say I disagree with this 100%.
Another point that bugs me is, as I briefly touched up on, a few people in fandom have said Henry "sexually harassed" Kate by calling her hot. If Kate hadn't been in the suit... if Hank and Kate had been blowing up shit in the lab and he looked over and said she was hot... how would Kate react? Because that's the telling part. I highly doubt she'd be offended, angry, or even bothered by it. I think she'd grin at him with that sparkle in her eye. The fact that Henry would even say that to her out loud shows me they're at a proximity in their relationship, friendship, and partnership where they're comfortable enough to say things like that to each other.
Men are allowed to think women are hot. Women are allowed to think men are hot. That's not disrespectful, it's biology. It's disrespectful when either genders are pigs about it, and that's really all I'm going to say about that unless anyone would like me to elaborate on why I feel this way.
Interestingly enough, in season two, in the episode "Hero 1", I don't recall any feminists jumping on the scene when Will eye sexes Magnus after Walter reveals he has x-ray vision. And again, if Will or Henry were in a tight, leather suit, if Kate, Magnus, or any other woman commented on how hot they looked, would the same people calling accusations say the same thing? I can't say for sure, obviously, but most-likely not since the guys are dropping trou all the time on the show.
End rant. I hope I expressed my views clearly enough. Please feel free to discuss your thoughts on this with me. I'm always up for a good discussion!
unpopular opinion time: FRINGE
-
-
thoughtful
-
Sanctuary ficlet: "I Am Left Hoping Someday I'll Breathe Again"
Title: "I Am Left Hoping Someday I'll Breathe Again"
Author:
talkofcake
Rating: PG
Category: Angst (or as I like to say, "aaaaaangst")
Pairing: Helen/John
Summary: They're both waiting. Waiting for a day that will never arrive.
A/N: Just a short, reflective piece on the currency of their relationship. And it's Thursday! Which means tomorrow is 'For King and Country'! Cue the flails.
Thanks totelksy for the read-through! :)
( Collapse )
Author:
talkofcakeRating: PG
Category: Angst (or as I like to say, "aaaaaangst")
Pairing: Helen/John
Summary: They're both waiting. Waiting for a day that will never arrive.
A/N: Just a short, reflective piece on the currency of their relationship. And it's Thursday! Which means tomorrow is 'For King and Country'! Cue the flails.
Thanks to
telksy for the read-through! :)( Collapse )
-
- aaaaangst
-
hey, soul sister.
Sanctuary article. Why Isn't Helen Magnus Getting Laid?
Lovely title for an article. *rolls eyes*
Naturally, I have something to say about this. This article sort of implies that Helen Magnus needs a man on her arm (or in her bed) to be sensual. I highly disagree. I respect her more for not ( Collapse ) because that's what a two-dimensional character would have done. Their relationship is complex, but even more so, Magnus is complex. We have no idea what men or women she's with in her own time. I'd like to think that she has a list of lovers she sees time to time, but they're private, just like the rest of her life. If she isn't having regular sex (or even semi-regular sex), that is unfortunate and it would be nice for her to finally have someone to relieve the stress of her life, but I don't think it's necessary to see Helen Magnus as a sensual character.
Magnus, to me, is a strong, independent, powerful, intelligent, savvy woman who does not need anyone else to bring her to that level of sexy. It's one of the reasons I love her as opposed to, let's say, characters on shows like Glee where the girls need a boyfriend in order to have the status cool (nevermind they're silly 16-year-olds).
So would it be nice for Magnus to get laid? Yes. But so far, it doesn't look like she's complaining. She had an opportunity last week with a close friend and she clearly resisted. I respect her for that. She loves her friends and cares for them too much to have a one night stand with them. And judging by Next Tuesday, I honestly think a woman in her position has plenty of men or women willing to help her out when she needs it. ;) I do hope we don't ever get too much of a glimpse of that life though. It's private, it makes her more mysterious. The only reason Magnus doesn't seem as enigmatic as she used to is because the characters we see her through are getting closer to her. Look at how she was viewed by outside characters in Broken Arrow by people who had never met her before. Mysterious. Strong. Powerful. Intelligent. Not easy to undermine one bit.
One thing I do agree with in that article is that I miss the Will Vision. Not the special effects, per se, because Robin can rock the Will vision with or without them, but just the whole Sherlock Holmes side to the character. I do love that Will hasn't been reduced to just a psychiatrist (and I love getting little reminders of that's what he is), and he's not playing the second in command role pretty bad ass. He's a great counterbalance for Magnus.
Anyways, need to be off to work now. Let me know your thoughts! :)
Lovely title for an article. *rolls eyes*
Naturally, I have something to say about this. This article sort of implies that Helen Magnus needs a man on her arm (or in her bed) to be sensual. I highly disagree. I respect her more for not ( Collapse ) because that's what a two-dimensional character would have done. Their relationship is complex, but even more so, Magnus is complex. We have no idea what men or women she's with in her own time. I'd like to think that she has a list of lovers she sees time to time, but they're private, just like the rest of her life. If she isn't having regular sex (or even semi-regular sex), that is unfortunate and it would be nice for her to finally have someone to relieve the stress of her life, but I don't think it's necessary to see Helen Magnus as a sensual character.
Magnus, to me, is a strong, independent, powerful, intelligent, savvy woman who does not need anyone else to bring her to that level of sexy. It's one of the reasons I love her as opposed to, let's say, characters on shows like Glee where the girls need a boyfriend in order to have the status cool (nevermind they're silly 16-year-olds).
So would it be nice for Magnus to get laid? Yes. But so far, it doesn't look like she's complaining. She had an opportunity last week with a close friend and she clearly resisted. I respect her for that. She loves her friends and cares for them too much to have a one night stand with them. And judging by Next Tuesday, I honestly think a woman in her position has plenty of men or women willing to help her out when she needs it. ;) I do hope we don't ever get too much of a glimpse of that life though. It's private, it makes her more mysterious. The only reason Magnus doesn't seem as enigmatic as she used to is because the characters we see her through are getting closer to her. Look at how she was viewed by outside characters in Broken Arrow by people who had never met her before. Mysterious. Strong. Powerful. Intelligent. Not easy to undermine one bit.
One thing I do agree with in that article is that I miss the Will Vision. Not the special effects, per se, because Robin can rock the Will vision with or without them, but just the whole Sherlock Holmes side to the character. I do love that Will hasn't been reduced to just a psychiatrist (and I love getting little reminders of that's what he is), and he's not playing the second in command role pretty bad ass. He's a great counterbalance for Magnus.
Anyways, need to be off to work now. Let me know your thoughts! :)
wallpaper & banner
-
- artistic
-
hoo wah.
Happy birthday, Robin! In celebration, have a Will Zimmerman wallpaper. If you need a different size, just ask. :)
oh, fandom.
I wanna talk TV 'biz for a sec. Please feel free to pass this post on to your friends.
Recently, Syfy hacked Caprica. Canceled it. Took it from their active programming. Red-lighted it? I don't know. Call it what you want, but Caprica is done.
Why?
Because it's ratings sucked. Meaning: it didn't get viewers.
No, the fault isn't Syfy's advertising. No, Syfy didn't hate Caprica. If they hated it, why would they air it? There's plenty of other shows they could spend money on. They even tried moving it to Tuesday nights, which is sort of the hotspot on Syfy. Both Warehouse 13 and Eureka have done phenomenal on Tuesday nights, so regardless of how you feel about its move, they were actually trying to help it. Did it help? No, it did not. But that's not Syfy's fault, that is simply because it did not generate an audience. If your show is receiving barely 900K viewers an episode, this is very, very bad and you can almost be assured it will not see another season.
The only thing puzzling about this to me is that Syfy is not airing the final five (*snerk*) episodes until 2011. Perhaps they are going to rework the final story arc to be more conclusive. Whatever their reasoning, I'm sure it's not as mindless as 'because we can' since, while many people who hate Syfy would like to think they have no idea what they're doing, they are actually a multi-billion business who generate a butt load of money every year. 'Because we can' simply is not a logical business mantra, so I trust there is a reason behind this tactic.
There's talk of boycotting Syfy amongst the Caprica fans. They're quitting the channel cold turkey, which means Sanctuary, SGU, Warehouse 13, Eureka, and all of the other programs will be losing viewers.
I just need to ask.
How does this make sense?
Your show didn't get viewers - which means the fault lies in the television audience who didn't connect with the show, give it a chance, or illegally downloaded when there were other options available - so you're going to contribute to the possibility of other network cancellations in the same fashion?
Logical.
Guys, if you know anyone who is planning on boycotting Syfy on Caprica's behalf, please send some valid points their way. Boycotting the channel will not only narrow the chances of Caprica's return (if there is no Syfy, how would there be a Caprica?), it's just plain stupid. If you're going to boycott, go out into the public and yell at the people who didn't watch. I would hate to see any other Syfy programming that's actually getting decent ratings right now suffer because of misplaced blame.
Did I hate Caprica? No way. I loved it. To death. I think it was one of the smartest shows on TV right now. This is completely my opinion, but I think the show's lack of success has to do with the dramatic difference between Caprica and Battlestar Galactica. BSG was an action-driven space opera, whereas Caprica was mostly drama-driven. The target audience wasn't the same, per se, so I think its safe to assume that the massive amounts of fans that would have come in from BSG gave the first few episodes a chance (if even), then gave up.
Which doesn't really lead me into my next point, but I'm going to pretend it does.
Watch shows live, guys! I understand we can't always. DVR if you can't. DVR sittings are counted, just not in the initial ratings. If you do not have the means to watch a show live whether it be because of the country you're in, lack of cable/satellite, etc., the next best thing would be to stream your shows through official websites, like http://syfy.com. The next best things after that include Hulu, iTunes, Amazon, and of course, DVD sales. Illegally downloading is just secondhand to most internet users, but there's absolutely no effective method of tracking illegal downloads, nor does this contribute to sales in any way. And since television is a business, first and foremost, no sales = no shows. My thoughts would be, if you live in a place where the show doesn't air and you illegally download but want to keep your show on the air, try to contribute in one of these ways as well.
I'm going to miss Caprica dearly, and man does it make me mad we won't see the last five episodes until 2011. But boycotting Syfy will not be effective in any way, other than to spread negativity throughout fandom when this is the time for positivity. If you want to see the show back, join in the petitions, tell your friends about the show and have them catch up either through syfy.com, Hulu, iTunes, DVDs. Perhaps a massive amount of sudden viewers and DVD sales would get the attention of Syfy's advertisers.
Have any questions? Feel free to ask. I'm not a pro, but if I don't know the answer, the chances are someone does. I hope this was a little enlightening for someone.
Last but not least, please remain civil. I won't tolerate anything resembling immaturity in this post (i.e. telling Syfy or anyone else for that matter how to copulate with themselves in very creative positions).
Recently, Syfy hacked Caprica. Canceled it. Took it from their active programming. Red-lighted it? I don't know. Call it what you want, but Caprica is done.
Why?
Because it's ratings sucked. Meaning: it didn't get viewers.
No, the fault isn't Syfy's advertising. No, Syfy didn't hate Caprica. If they hated it, why would they air it? There's plenty of other shows they could spend money on. They even tried moving it to Tuesday nights, which is sort of the hotspot on Syfy. Both Warehouse 13 and Eureka have done phenomenal on Tuesday nights, so regardless of how you feel about its move, they were actually trying to help it. Did it help? No, it did not. But that's not Syfy's fault, that is simply because it did not generate an audience. If your show is receiving barely 900K viewers an episode, this is very, very bad and you can almost be assured it will not see another season.
The only thing puzzling about this to me is that Syfy is not airing the final five (*snerk*) episodes until 2011. Perhaps they are going to rework the final story arc to be more conclusive. Whatever their reasoning, I'm sure it's not as mindless as 'because we can' since, while many people who hate Syfy would like to think they have no idea what they're doing, they are actually a multi-billion business who generate a butt load of money every year. 'Because we can' simply is not a logical business mantra, so I trust there is a reason behind this tactic.
There's talk of boycotting Syfy amongst the Caprica fans. They're quitting the channel cold turkey, which means Sanctuary, SGU, Warehouse 13, Eureka, and all of the other programs will be losing viewers.
I just need to ask.
How does this make sense?
Your show didn't get viewers - which means the fault lies in the television audience who didn't connect with the show, give it a chance, or illegally downloaded when there were other options available - so you're going to contribute to the possibility of other network cancellations in the same fashion?
Logical.
Guys, if you know anyone who is planning on boycotting Syfy on Caprica's behalf, please send some valid points their way. Boycotting the channel will not only narrow the chances of Caprica's return (if there is no Syfy, how would there be a Caprica?), it's just plain stupid. If you're going to boycott, go out into the public and yell at the people who didn't watch. I would hate to see any other Syfy programming that's actually getting decent ratings right now suffer because of misplaced blame.
Did I hate Caprica? No way. I loved it. To death. I think it was one of the smartest shows on TV right now. This is completely my opinion, but I think the show's lack of success has to do with the dramatic difference between Caprica and Battlestar Galactica. BSG was an action-driven space opera, whereas Caprica was mostly drama-driven. The target audience wasn't the same, per se, so I think its safe to assume that the massive amounts of fans that would have come in from BSG gave the first few episodes a chance (if even), then gave up.
Which doesn't really lead me into my next point, but I'm going to pretend it does.
Watch shows live, guys! I understand we can't always. DVR if you can't. DVR sittings are counted, just not in the initial ratings. If you do not have the means to watch a show live whether it be because of the country you're in, lack of cable/satellite, etc., the next best thing would be to stream your shows through official websites, like http://syfy.com. The next best things after that include Hulu, iTunes, Amazon, and of course, DVD sales. Illegally downloading is just secondhand to most internet users, but there's absolutely no effective method of tracking illegal downloads, nor does this contribute to sales in any way. And since television is a business, first and foremost, no sales = no shows. My thoughts would be, if you live in a place where the show doesn't air and you illegally download but want to keep your show on the air, try to contribute in one of these ways as well.
I'm going to miss Caprica dearly, and man does it make me mad we won't see the last five episodes until 2011. But boycotting Syfy will not be effective in any way, other than to spread negativity throughout fandom when this is the time for positivity. If you want to see the show back, join in the petitions, tell your friends about the show and have them catch up either through syfy.com, Hulu, iTunes, DVDs. Perhaps a massive amount of sudden viewers and DVD sales would get the attention of Syfy's advertisers.
Have any questions? Feel free to ask. I'm not a pro, but if I don't know the answer, the chances are someone does. I hope this was a little enlightening for someone.
Last but not least, please remain civil. I won't tolerate anything resembling immaturity in this post (i.e. telling Syfy or anyone else for that matter how to copulate with themselves in very creative positions).
-
- sleepy
-
Re: "STFU fandom"
So apparently there's a Kate/Henry vs. Kate/Will shipping war started by all the Kate/Henry shippers since all of the Kate/Will shippers are above that.
I'm going to quickly disclaim that I don't know every single Kate/Henry shipper out there, but I know a lot of the 'vocal' ones; the ones involved in fandom.
But... WHAT?
I'm sorry. There is no war. A war is bashing the "other side's" ship. Name-calling. Bashing the "other side's" shippers. More name-calling. If you're calling this a ship war ("I don't like this ship" "I don't see this ship" "I don't understand this ship" "I would rather see this ship" "I heart my ship"), you're trying way too hard to start drama.
Just because two opposing opinions exist does not mean there's a war going on; it means there's two opposing opinions and a world full of people with varying outlooks.
Of course we're all going to joke. Of course we're all going to have WTF moments over a ship we don't like. And we're very much entitled to. That? Is not war.
It's funny how people parade the "each to their own" mantra and can't follow it themselves.
I needed to get that off my chest.
I'm going to quickly disclaim that I don't know every single Kate/Henry shipper out there, but I know a lot of the 'vocal' ones; the ones involved in fandom.
But... WHAT?
I'm sorry. There is no war. A war is bashing the "other side's" ship. Name-calling. Bashing the "other side's" shippers. More name-calling. If you're calling this a ship war ("I don't like this ship" "I don't see this ship" "I don't understand this ship" "I would rather see this ship" "I heart my ship"), you're trying way too hard to start drama.
Just because two opposing opinions exist does not mean there's a war going on; it means there's two opposing opinions and a world full of people with varying outlooks.
Of course we're all going to joke. Of course we're all going to have WTF moments over a ship we don't like. And we're very much entitled to. That? Is not war.
It's funny how people parade the "each to their own" mantra and can't follow it themselves.
I needed to get that off my chest.
-
-
annoyed
-