Tumblr page for Racebending.com - Media Consumers for Entertainment Equality.

Please feel free to browse our tumblr page for the latest community-sourced information about media representation in Hollywood.

Reblogged from bisexual-books  1,667 notes

bisexual-books:

It’s time for another Bisexual Books giveaway!  Bisexual YA author Corinne Duyvis was generous enough to send us some swag from her US tour and we’re happy to pass it along to you guys!  

You could win all the fantastic goodies pictured above:

Now all the boring rules stuff:

  • This giveaway is open to everyone (yes international friends this includes you).  
  • You must be following us here at bisexual-books to win
  • You must reblog this post (likes don’t count for this one sorry guys).   
  • You can reblog as many times as you’d like
  • But no giveaway blogs  
  • Winners will be chosen August 10th at 8pm CST

And don’t forget to enter our other two awesome giveaways — one for bisexual comics and the other for romance!

Reblogged from gamerisms  20,000 notes
    Anonymous asked
    If the protagonist is queer, and the story doesn't revolve around romance, then why is the protagonist queer in the first place if it's largely irrelevant? I'm simply curious .

    Answer:

    thetrolliestcritic:

    fandomsandfeminism:

    pyroclast:

    thewritingcafe:

    Because our lives are not defined by romance and sex and we deserve better and more diverse stories than that.

    "If straight people don’t get to gawk over your sex lives then what’s the point of you existing?"

    I’m both laughing and crying that anyone even asked this question without seeing how terrible that is, but also because representation for queer people has failed so relentlessly that it’s bred this idea that unless sex or romance is the topic of the story, queer people don’t need to be apart of it.

You are 12. You’re at the library looking for some generic young adult fiction novel about a girl who falls for her best friend. Your dad makes a disgusted face. “This is about lesbians,” he says. The word falls out of his mouth as though it pains him. You check out a different book and cry when you get home, but you aren’t sure why. You learn that this is not a story about you, and if it is, you are disgusting.

You are 15. Your relatives are fawning over your cousin’s new boyfriend. “When will you have a boyfriend?” they ask. You shrug. “Maybe she’s one of those lesbians,” your grandpa says. You don’t say anything. You learn that to find love and acceptance from your family, you need a boyfriend who thinks you are worthy of love and acceptance.

You are 18. Your first boyfriend demands to know why you never want to have sex with him. He tells you that sex is normal and healthy. You learn that something is wrong with you.

You are 13. You’re at a pool party with a relative’s friend’s daughter. “There’s this lesbian in my gym class. It’s so gross,” she says. “Ugh, that’s disgusting,” another girl adds. They ask you, “do you have any lesbians at your school?” You tell them no and they say you are lucky. You learn to stay away from other girls.

You are 20. You have coffee with a girl and you can’t stop thinking about her for days afterwards. You learn the difference between a new friendship and new feelings for a person.

You are 13. Your mom is watching a movie. You see two girls kiss on screen. You feel butterflies and this sense that you identify with the girls on the screen. Your mom gets up and covers the screen. You learn that if you are like those girls, no one wants to see it.

You are 20. You and your friends are drunk and your ex-boyfriend dares you to make out with your friend. You both agree. You touch her face. It feels soft and warm. Her lips are small and her hands feel soft on your back. You learn the difference between being attracted to someone and recognizing that someone you care about is attractive.

You are 16. You find lesbian porn online. Their eyes look dead and their bodies are positioned in a way that you had never imagined. You learn that liking girls is acceptable if straight men can decide the terms.

You are 20. You are lying next to a beautiful girl and talking about everything. You tell her things that you don’t usually tell anyone. You learn how it feels not to want to go to sleep because you don’t want to miss out on any time with someone.

You are 18. You are in intro to women’s and gender studies. “Not all feminists are lesbians- I love my husband! Most of the feminists on our leadership team are straight! It’s just a stereotype,” the professor exclaims. You learn that lesbianism is something to separate yourself from.

You are 15. Your parents are talking about a celebrity. Your dad has a grin on his face and says, “her girlfriend says that she’s having the best sex of her life with her!” You learn that being a lesbian is about the kind of sex you have and not how you love.

You are 21 and you are kissing a beautiful girl and she’s your girlfriend and you understand why people write songs and make movies and stupid facebook statuses about this and time around you just seems to stop and you could spend forever like this and you learn that there is nothing wrong with you and you are falling in love.

You are 21. And you are okay.

By a thing I wrote after arguing with an insensitive dude on facebook all day or Things Other People Taught me about Liking Girls (via radandangry)
Reblogged from gailsimone  1,074 notes

Okay, The White House Speech Is ON

gailsimone:

I am completely stunned and amazed, but this is apparently happening!

I am giving a short speech about LGBTQ and PWD characters in the media at the White House on Thursday. I haven’t had much notice and I spent a full day imagining that it had to be a prank or a terrible mistake, but it is actually going to happen.

I want to thank the literally hundreds of people in those groups who have written to offer support. I wish I could express my appreciation in person. I know I am lucky to have the readership I do. It’s the thing I still can’t believe about this job.

Anyway, I am not an authority on these topics and I think true activists are heroic but are working on a much higher level than I am, so I thought my speech would be about something I actually DO know a little bit about, which would be how things have changed for representation in the media, specifically comics. The progress we have seen, and of course, the long distance we have to go.

So I am posting this thread, for people who are lgbtq or pwd who have a thought they would like me to keep in mind.  Anything you would say if you had the chance at an event like this. I can’t guarantee it will be included, but I want to be a messenger rather than a fake ‘expert,’ if that makes sense.

I have said this many times. The only reason I know ANYTHING about these topics is because people like you right here on Tumblr were kind and patient enough to share your world with me a little bit and I hope to use this opportunity to pay you back.

Thank you.

Your thoughts are MOST WELCOME.

Signal Boost!

Reblogged from jhameia  35,633 notes

[Spiderman] represents the everyman, but he represents the underdog and those marginalized who come up against great prejudice which I, as a middle-class straight, white man, don’t really understand so much. And when Stan Lee first wrote and created this character, the outcast was the computer nerd, was the science nerd, was the guy that couldn’t get the girl. Those guys now run the world. So how much of an outcast is that version of Peter Parker anymore? That’s my question.

By

Part of Andrew Garfield’s response to people being all butthurt when he mentioned a possibility where Spiderman might not be straight.

Read More: On Andrew Garfield, Stan Lee, And A Bisexual Spider-Man

(via 500daysofsumeria)

It’ll be fun when Miles Morales takes over.

(via tariqk)

When I first became an actor, I wanted to play lots of roles - Guidos, gangsters and goombahs were my specialty. So, would I be able to play all of those parts after portraying a sensitive, moisturizing, Ashton Kutcher-loving, pink-shirt-wearing kid? I was optimistic. Hollywood? Not so much. I was meeting a “gay glass ceiling” in casting…

One time I wanted to audition for a supporting character in a low-budget indie movie described as a “doughy, blue-collar lug of a guy.” …I figured I was perfect for it.

They said they were looking for a real “man’s man.” The casting director wouldn’t even let me audition. This wasn’t the last time this happened. There were industry people who had seen me play you in Mean Girls but never seen me read in an audition but still denied me to be seen for “masculine” roles.

By Actor Daniel Franzese Writes a Touching Coming Out Letter To His Iconic ‘Mean Girls’ Character Damian. Franzese writes about how playing the role of Damian in the movie meant facing discrimination and typecasting in Hollywood.
However, I did turn down many offers to play flamboyant, feather-boa-slinging stereotypes that always seemed to be laughed at BECAUSE they were gay. How could I go from playing an inspirational, progressive gay youth to the embarrassing, cliched butt-of-a-joke?

It wasn’t until years later that grown men started to coming up to me on the street - some of them in tears - and thanking me for being a role model to them. Telling me I gave them comfort not only being young and gay but also being a big dude. It was then that I realized how much of an impact YOU had made on them.

    gijib-ae asked
    Did any trans woman audition for Jared Leto's part, do we have this information?

    Answer:

    if-our-worlds-collide:

    racebending:

    femgineer:

    racebending:

    I’m not sure what difference this necessarily makes because regardless of how many trans women Jared Leto “beat out” for the role (and who was doing the judging?  Cis producers?) there are still a lot of problems with this casting and the subsequent “Best Supporting Actor” acclaims.   

    If only 5 trans women auditioned for this role, then the production did not look hard enough before settling for a cis actor.   If 2000 trans women auditioned for this role and the production still thought Jared was better than all of them, then that says more about the production and Jared’s cis privilege than the quality of his acting. I suspect the number was closer to 0 than 2000.  There is no way to justify that Leto was the best actor for the role without also invalidating the work of every single trans actress as less talented.   And, as trans advocates have pointed out, Leto’s gender as a cis man “is important to the perception of the role. He is perpetuating the ‘man in a dress’ trope.”  The quality of his performance does not buffer against the reinforcement of this stereotype.   

    While there isn’t public information available about who else auditioned for the role of Rayon, Jared Leto has spoken about his audition experience.   Leto believes that the director “may have seen Rayon more as a drag queen or someone who enjoys pushing a gender envelope or dressing up in women’s clothing.”  In that case, it is more likely that cis actors auditioned fro the role of a drag queen, and Leto chose to interpret this character as a “transgendered" (not even the right language coming from someone who claims to be an ally) "beautiful creature.

    "There was a Skype meeting set up with the director [Jean-Marc Vallée]. It wasn’t really an audition, but it was kind of an audition, you know, underneath it all. But I decided to use it as a test really for myself to see what I had to offer. So I said hello via Skype, we were in Berlin, and it was wintertime. We were playing one of the biggest shows of our lives that night, I remember. I reached out and grabbed some lipstick and started to put it on, and you know, his mouth fell to the floor. I was wearing — I think this jacket — and I unbuttoned it and had on a little pink furry sweater, and I pulled it down over my shoulder and proceeded to flirt with him for the next 20 minutes and then woke up the next day with the official offer. Girl’s gotta do what a girl’s gotta do, baby." - Jared Leto on his audition for the role of Rayon.

    Director Jean Marc Vallee said of this audition:

    Do you know this actor Jared Leto? I just Skyped with him and he hit on me; He was feeling me up through the screen! I don’t know, it was very uncomfortable but I think we found Rayon.”

    It’s sad, because it seems like from the start Rayon was an amalgam of cis men’s stereotypes of a provocative trans women.  So of course the perfect Rayon is overly flirtatious and sexualized in a way that makes people uncomfortable.  Of course the perfect Rayon is someone who gets the job by playing up the sexuality by hitting on a cis straight man.

    The director stated in a CBC interview he never thought once of getting a trans woman and dismissed the possibility.

    Here’s the quote

    Quebec filmmaker Jean-Marc Vallée, who directed Dallas Buyers Club, spoke to CBC’s Jian Ghomeshi, who asked whether he ever considered casting a transgender actor.

    • "Never. [Are] there any transgender actors?" he said. "I’m not aiming for the real thing. I’m aiming for an experienced actor who wants to portray the thing."

    The director did not even bother to take a quick second to google to see if trans actors exist and did not even consider the possibility of casting a trans person in this role.  (Also, an unfortunate use of the word “thing” given the context.)

    To me, this doesn’t even seem like this is something that should be controversial.  This information speaks for itself.  Whatever Leto’s performance was or meant, they continued marginalizing the experience of trans women so that they could continue giving voice to a cis man and then bathed him in hero worship for being willing to put on lipstick.  It should be enough to be allowed to say into the universe that this is problematic and that continuing to celebrate Leto’s ability to wear “trans” as a costume is to say that you’re only brave for being visible as trans when you’re pretending.  He now gets to step away from that identity and continue being a white cis man in a society that thinks he’s brave and sophisticated, while simultaneously continuing to shut out the experiences of women who cannot remove themselves from that identity.  

    Say what you will about his performance, but it should not be controversial to say that the production choices, the director’s mindset, and Leto’s new status in Hollywood due to this role are all problematic.  That should be an ok part of the discussion.  

    Also, fuck anyone who calls any human a beautiful creature.  What the fuck is that?

    bolded for emphasis

Reblogged from transhollywood  12,549 notes

A Step By Step Guide through Jared Leto’s Trans Ignorance.

transhollywood:

Jared Leto has been winning multiple awards for playing the transgender character of Rayon in the film “Dallas Buyers Club.” The transgender community has then watched him throw them under the bus.

1. LETO"It was the role of a lifetime," he said. "It was an incredible thing to represent this group of people who largely are ignored." 

Ignored. Leto ignored criticism from the trans community and allies who don’t want him representing this group of people in the way he has been. "wouldn’t it have been better if the starring role had gone to an actual trans person" - La Times.  Despite complaints and Leto having one of the most powerful publicists in Hollywood, Leto claimed in December that he had never heard criticisms that trans roles should go to trans actors. When asked what research he did for the role he said “a lot” but he did not formally engage, pay, or study under any trans people.

Transgender roles should go to transgender actors and if that is not possible (for whatever reason) productions should hire transgender consultants to “get it right” instead of perpetuating negative stereotypes. 

Jared ignores this: 

2. LETO"you wouldn’t want to stick a transgender person with only transgender roles, so it goes both ways." 

Transgender people DO NOT GET cisgender roles. It does not go both ways due to systemic oppression. Cisgender people take transgender roles then do what Leto is doing instead of the advocating and “possibility modeling” of Laverne Cox in “Orange is the New Black.” She represents trans people beyond the screen role in the media in positive ways never experienced before. This creates “teachable moments” as Katie Couric put it after her problematic questioning.  When a cis person takes a trans role, trans stories are exploitation, not representation. 

Meanwhile, Trans Hollywood’s experience is that trans people are often told they do not have enough experience for key roles. It’s a systemic problem, cis people take trans roles, trans actors are left with nothing. 

3.  "I thought I’d look pretty good in a skirt." 

No Jared, the character of Rayon is fictional in this film “based on a true story.” She was ahistorically written in order to be the “most gay” and visually problematic for Matthew McConaughey’s character Ron Woodroof. You removed your eyebrows (?) and played her with intense makeup, hair, and clothing to make Ron uncomfortable and a very unlikely ally.

image

You weren’t there to look good, you were there to look bad. You are perpetuating the “man in a dress” stereotype of transgender women. 

image

What if the role had gone to these transgender women?  Would the theater laughed as hard at Ron ripping down Rayon’s photo while masturbating? How would the supermarket scene have played out if Ron was just seen walking around with a beautiful woman vs. a straight cis male playing….what…..

4.LETO: ”This wonderful creature who was unfortunately addicted to drugs and dying of AIDS and fighting for her life.” and “beautiful creature….”

While you’ve made it clear in interviews that Rayon was living life as a woman and wanted trans related medial care but you don’t talk about playing a woman or trans woman. You talk about playing a “creature.” USE THE WORDS “TRANSGENDER WOMAN.” Again, how do you feel you are representing “this group of people” if you never use the terminology? If you call one of us a creature. We don’t want you up there Jared if you are just going to be a bro about it. 

5. LETO: ”It’s wild, even putting on lipstick is a very shocking thing, [and] putting on heels is a very shocking thing, putting on tights is a shocking thing” “. One of the things I did was wax my entire body including my eyebrows,’ 'I'm just fortunate that it wasn't a period piece so I didn't have to do a full Brazilian [wax].  'Ladies, you know what I'm talking about though…and so do some of you men, I think.'

All superficial gendering. People are not giving the award to rockstar Jared Leto who talks about how weird it is to do things femme cis women and femme trans women do every day. They gave it to what seemed like a serious actor in a demanding role. Jared did not use the role as a learning moment to be forever changed by trans struggle. Instead he jokes about it like a cis man does, it’s trans misogyny. When asked about leaving the role behind….

6. LETO “I tucked those balls firmly away… I’m still coughing them out.”

Come on, is he our drunk uncle making fun of us? And on criticism for his Golden Globe’s speech…

7. LETO “obviously I didn’t prepare a speech.” 

But he did! He gave nearly the identical speech at the Hollywood Film Awards. 

Hollywood Film Awards Speech: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvrdfggN8RY&noredirect=1

Golden Globes Speech: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FymvWjHYMN8

This led to proper criticism over the transphobia and exploitation: 

Jared Leto and Michael Douglas’ Homophobic Acceptance Speeches

The Golden Globes gave Jared Leto an award for playing a trans woman because Hollywood is terrible. 

C’mon Hollywood

So is anything changing? YES!. Leto’s SAG AWARD Speech dispensed with the cheap jokes and had some class, dedicating the award to the groups he borrowed emotional equity from instead of being about himself, his waxing, and his return to film after six years, and the great parties: 

8. LETO: " I’d like to share it with the Rayons of the world. To the people who have made a choice to live their lives … as they have chosen to dream it. I’m so proud that i’ve been able to glimpse the world through your eyes." 

There is learning happening but it seems more as a response to backlash than actual learning or community. What is next? We do not identify as “Rayons.” Say the word “TRANSGENDER.” We appreciate the attempt at recognizing a marginalized group but Leto is avoiding our self identity, making up his own point of view on what we are and should be called. We are organizing so this learning curve never happens again. We need trans actors in trans roles for visibility, representation, and positive models instead of wanting to vomit listening to a cis man make fun of us. We don’t want to be writing Tumblr posts and articles defending ourself from a person who thinks they are representing us. While in this period of civil rights, we want to see ourselves truly represented and moving forward.

Reblogged from cytoplashm  2,971 notes

drwoners:

racebending:

Cis men like Jared Leto have their pick of roles in Hollywood. Meanwhile, trans actors are rarely considered, and when substantial roles are written as trans they are almost always cast with cis actors. The cis actors are celebrated as the trans actors are shut out, and this is wrong.

are you cis i can see that asterisk actually get it away please?????? ew???? ew

Yes, I am cis, and I have a lot to learn and am still learning. I want to apologize for not doing my due diligence and doing my research before using the word “trans*” with an asterisk. I have since googled and read articles on the submit and I see now how it is often an invalidating term under a veneer of inclusiveness. It was ignorant and thoughtless and bad allyship and I apologize for causing you pain. I will be going through the reblogs on my site with the asterisk and editing them out. Thank you for being willing to be vulnerable to call me out and to remind me of my privilege. I will not use the asterisk in the future.

Reblogged from musicanonymus  2,971 notes

musicanonymus:

racebending:

Cis men like Jared Leto have their pick of roles in Hollywood. Meanwhile, trans actors are rarely considered, and when substantial roles are written as trans they are almost always cast with cis actors. The cis actors are celebrated as the trans actors are shut out, and this is wrong.

Or maybe they chose him because he’s an amazing actor, who they thought could do the part …

I was expecting at least one person to naively respond with this exact argument. On the surface it sounds really compelling—believe me, I used to spout defensive stuff like this all the time. Pretending it is all a meritocracy, prioritizing an actor’s “talent” over the representation of marginalized people…

When we say things like this, we are basically saying that the best people to portray trans characters are people who are not trans. As if good acting and being trans are mutually exclusive, and that is good enough of a reason to justify leaving them out of stories about them.

And the arrogance, the enormous arrogance of us cis people to think that we can portray the struggles of trans people better than they can—better than the people who have to live in the cissexist world that we create that they have to live in!

Jared Leto played trans in a movie and tonight he’s taking home that golden statue. Tommorow he will wake up and field a ton of phone calls offering him roles to play exciting cis characters. Meanwhile, trans people will continue to struggle for representation in the scarce amount of films about them. They’ll continue to struggle for basic rights while Dallas Buyers Club and the Academy’s Best Supporting Actor award for a trans woman character reinforce to the average cis person that the gender identities of trans people are not real, that the best actors to play trans characters are cis actors, and that trans people are not needed in movies with trans characters.

Reblogged from hell0donnie  5,497 notes

despite the fact that women and nonwhite individuals are more likely to identify as LGBT, regular/recurring LGBT characters on broadcast and cable networks are are 72% and 71% white, respectively, and overwhelmingly male. It seems likely that onscreen representation reflects the demographics of television creators, not of the television audience.

By Autostraddle, GLAAD’s “Where We Are On TV” Shows Best Place To Be On TV Is Behind The Camera (via realtimelord)
Reblogged from mcyukimura  19,150 notes

girlwhowalkedtheearth:

I finally processed the information on the leads for the top 250 grossing films (I’m going to do 500 in all), and I have some really, really great facts:

  • Of the films, 209 starred a straight white man, or had a straight white male voice actor. This translates to 83.6% of all these films having a straight white male protagonist.
  • This left only 41 films with a protagonist who was a person of colour and/or woman (no films had an LGBTQ+ protagonist).  This translated to 16.4% of all the films. 
  • "So what? Straight white men are the majority group in America." a) no, the largest demographic group in America is actually technically straight white women, and b) not by 83.6% they fucking aren’t. 
  • If we look at American demographics (America is where these films are being made and mostly marketed for, after all) we find that only 31.3% of people in the USA are straight white men, while 68.7% are not. 
  • This means that 31.3% of the US population is recieving 83.6% of the representation, and the remaining 68.7% majority are squabbling over the remaining 16.4%. That’s unbelievably, amazingly shit. 

BUT: The world isn’t split into straight white men and everyone else, so let’s break this down further. Of the 41 films left over for the rest of us:

  • 10 starred a straight black man. (8 of these leads were played by Will Smith.), making up 2.5% of all the films. 
  • 26 starred a straight white woman, making up 10.4% of all the films.
  • 2 films starred straight South Asian men, making up 0.8% of the films.
  • 1 film starred an East Asian man and 1 starred a Middle Eastern man - 0.4% of the films each.
  • A grand total of ONE of the 250 highest grossing films of all time stars a woman of colour. Scraping in at number 242, and made in 1995, it’s Pocahontas; which is racist as fuck and demeans the memory of a real Native American woman. Fantastic. It’ll also probably have fallen out of the top 250 by the next year, while no other films with WoC leads seem likely to replace it.
  • This means that huge demographic groups are missing. 16.3% of people in the US identify as Latin@, and not a single film on this list has a Latin@ protagonist.
  • Roughly 10% of the US identifies as LGBT+. None of these films has a LGBTQ+ protagonist. 
  • The reason that these films are so high grossing is because of the marketing they recieve. Studios are putting all of their money into films with straight white men, preventing casting of women and people of colour and just generally fucking people over; but this isn’t any necessary indication of what people are willing to see at all. It’s worth noting that the single most successful actor on that list is Will Smith. People are clearly willing to pay out money to watch Will Smith doing stuff, and studios are backing this and enabling more and more films of Will Smith (and his son) doing more and more stuff. His popularity shows fairly clearly that cinemagoers are definitely willing to watch (and probably actively demanding of, seeing as people of colour and white women are more likely to go to the cinema) men of colour in film, and the success of franchises such as Twilight and The Hunger Games shows audiences backing white women (women of colour have yet to be given a real chance). As such, we can definitively say that this is especially a problem with Hollywood, and withe the people making these films - a problem which obviously needs to change.

Tl; dr: Representation in Hollywood is really, really shit. 

  • Straight white men are 31.3% of the population, 83.6% of the leads. Lucky bastards.
  • People of colour are 28.6% of the population, 6.4% of the leads (2.8% if you remove Will Smith, thanks Will.)
  • Women are 51% of the population, 10.8% of the leads. 
  • There’s no intersection here. If you’re a woman of colour, an LGBTQ+ woman and/or LGBTQ+ person of colour, then you’re getting fuck all.
Reblogged from fandomsandfeminism  10,409 notes
fandomsandfeminism:

Be the good girl you always have to be: Is Frozen’s Elsa the queer heroine we need, but not the one we deserve? 
Another Disney film and another wave of reviews, reading, and critisisms are beginning to hit the internet. Amid discussions of Disney’s ongoing race problems, feminist-friendly trope subversions, and the eternal question of “why the hell is that Reindeer acting like a dog?” one question stands out to me: Is Queen Elsa, well, queer?  
There certainly is a compelling case for it. On the obvious level, Elsa has no love interest in the piece (her sister, Anna, gets two!) Hans himself says that “no one was making progress” with Elsa in a romantic sense. Now, I’m not about to argue that any young woman about to take control of a country who isn’t interested in a boyfriend is a lesbian. Similar comments were made about Brave’s Merida, and honestly, that in itself isn’t enough for a decent queer reading.
But with Elsa there is more. So much more.
Effectively, her ice powers are a convenient LGBTQIAP+ metaphor (much in the same vein as the X-Men’s mutant powers.) 
Elsa has been born with these powers (she’s literally born that way). They are an integral part of who she is as a person, but she is forced by her parents to keep that part of her hidden. If people know, they would reject her, she would be in danger, made into a pariah by her own people. So she is made a self-exile instead. Full of fear of experiencing the isolation and discrimination that LGBTQIAP+ people know so well, Elsa hides away from everyone, even her sister. 
Watching Elsa struggle to keep up her mask or normalcy is heart breaking. She wears gloves all the time, constantly afraid to touch other people. Her father’s words- her mantra is- “Conceal, Don’t Feel.” Hide who you are. Don’t follow your heart. Don’t feel your feelings. “Be the good girl you always have to be.” She is, rather obviously and metaphorically, in the closet about her true inner self. 
But on the day when she comes of age- her Coronation day, when she is finally a young woman and no longer a girl- her secret is revealed. 
Elsa’s “Let It Go” is an epic ballad. Transitioning from a lament, to self-acceptance, all the way to self-celebration, Elsa literally strips away her confinements (hair pieces, crowns, gloves, cloaks, sleeves) and transforms into a sparkling, confidant woman.  She says “That perfect girl is gone / Here I stand in the light of day /Let the storm rage on /The cold never bothered me anyway” To deny that it sounds like a bit of a coming out ballad for those of us who have gone through the same struggle is putting it mildly. 
To read Elsa as a queer heroine, to read her struggle as a queer struggle, and to see the ending where Anna proves that she loves her sister no matter what and she is able to go back home as she truly is, adds such a level of depth to an already lovely film. 

Now, let me be clear: a queer reading for Elsa is easy and, for me, compelling. She may very well be the queer icon that many of us NEED right now- high profile, sparkling, with a karaoke worthy ballad.
But ultimately, Elsa isn’t the queer icon we DESERVE. Her queerness is simply an interpretation, a reading built on metaphor and subtext. She is not canonly queer. she does not give visibility and representation to the LGBTQIAP+ community. 
What we DESERVE is a queer heroine who’s queerness is more than subtext. I’m talking Girl meets girl, big sweeping love ballads, true love’s first kiss, all of it. And someday, we WILL get it. Elsa just isn’t that.  
 

fandomsandfeminism:

Be the good girl you always have to be: Is Frozen’s Elsa the queer heroine we need, but not the one we deserve? 

Another Disney film and another wave of reviews, reading, and critisisms are beginning to hit the internet. Amid discussions of Disney’s ongoing race problems, feminist-friendly trope subversions, and the eternal question of “why the hell is that Reindeer acting like a dog?” one question stands out to me: Is Queen Elsa, well, queer?  

There certainly is a compelling case for it. On the obvious level, Elsa has no love interest in the piece (her sister, Anna, gets two!) Hans himself says that “no one was making progress” with Elsa in a romantic sense. Now, I’m not about to argue that any young woman about to take control of a country who isn’t interested in a boyfriend is a lesbian. Similar comments were made about Brave’s Merida, and honestly, that in itself isn’t enough for a decent queer reading.

But with Elsa there is more. So much more.

Effectively, her ice powers are a convenient LGBTQIAP+ metaphor (much in the same vein as the X-Men’s mutant powers.) 

Elsa has been born with these powers (she’s literally born that way). They are an integral part of who she is as a person, but she is forced by her parents to keep that part of her hidden. If people know, they would reject her, she would be in danger, made into a pariah by her own people. So she is made a self-exile instead. Full of fear of experiencing the isolation and discrimination that LGBTQIAP+ people know so well, Elsa hides away from everyone, even her sister. 

Watching Elsa struggle to keep up her mask or normalcy is heart breaking. She wears gloves all the time, constantly afraid to touch other people. Her father’s words- her mantra is- “Conceal, Don’t Feel.” Hide who you are. Don’t follow your heart. Don’t feel your feelings. “Be the good girl you always have to be.” She is, rather obviously and metaphorically, in the closet about her true inner self. 

But on the day when she comes of age- her Coronation day, when she is finally a young woman and no longer a girl- her secret is revealed. 

Elsa’s “Let It Go” is an epic ballad. Transitioning from a lament, to self-acceptance, all the way to self-celebration, Elsa literally strips away her confinements (hair pieces, crowns, gloves, cloaks, sleeves) and transforms into a sparkling, confidant woman.  She says “That perfect girl is gone / Here I stand in the light of day /Let the storm rage on /The cold never bothered me anyway” To deny that it sounds like a bit of a coming out ballad for those of us who have gone through the same struggle is putting it mildly. 

To read Elsa as a queer heroine, to read her struggle as a queer struggle, and to see the ending where Anna proves that she loves her sister no matter what and she is able to go back home as she truly is, adds such a level of depth to an already lovely film. 

Now, let me be clear: a queer reading for Elsa is easy and, for me, compelling. She may very well be the queer icon that many of us NEED right now- high profile, sparkling, with a karaoke worthy ballad.

But ultimately, Elsa isn’t the queer icon we DESERVE. Her queerness is simply an interpretation, a reading built on metaphor and subtext. She is not canonly queer. she does not give visibility and representation to the LGBTQIAP+ community.

What we DESERVE is a queer heroine who’s queerness is more than subtext. I’m talking Girl meets girl, big sweeping love ballads, true love’s first kiss, all of it. And someday, we WILL get it. Elsa just isn’t that.  

 

Reblogged from disneydiversity  14,855 notes

[Mary Poppins author P.L.] Travers was a feisty, stereotype-breaking bisexual — a single mom who adopted a baby in her 40s, studied Zen meditation in Kyoto, and was publishing erotica about her silky underwear 10 years before Walt had sketched his mouse. Now that’s a character worth slapping on-screen, instead of this stiff British stereotype determined to steal joy from future generations of children. With her longtime girlfriend and then-adult son erased, this frigid Travers seems like she may not even know how babies are made. Maybe Mary Poppins could sing her a song about it.

Why does it matter that Saving Mr. Banks sabotages its supposed heroine? Because in a Hollywood where men still pen 85 percent of all films, there’s something sour in a movie that roots against a woman who asserted her artistic control by asking to be a co-screenwriter. (Another battle she lost — Mary Poppins’ opening credits list Travers as merely a “consultant.”) Just as slimy is the sense that this film, made by a studio conglomerate in a Hollywood dominated by studio conglomerates, is tricking us into cheering for the corporation over the creator.

By

-Amy Nicholson, on why Disney’s Saving Mr. Banks Is a “Corporate, Borderline-Sexist Spoonful of Lies”. (via infectedworldmind)

welp there goes my interest in the film

(via flatluigi)

ugh

(via rincewitch)

I was wondering, given the truth about Travers’ disgust with Disney, how Disney was even willing to make such a film.

Now I get it.

Bleh.

(via dontbearuiner)

I didn’t even know what this film was supposed to be about til now.

(via petticoatruler)

The trailer also hinted that Travers wrote Mary Poppins bc she wanted the nanny to “save” the father, which is so far from the point of the Mary Poppins series as to be ridiculous. Disney has literally done everything they could with this movie to remove all the female character’s autonomy and actual personalities and turned them into emotional prompts for the male characters to be inspired by and change.

(via stupendous-operatic-spectacle)

Reblogged from erathem  39,646 notes

moschid:

"it’s unrealistic for EVERY character to be queer" yeah well it’s also unrealistic for EVERY character to be straight & cis. and it’s also unrealistic for giant monsters from another dimension to suddenly attack earth and for a little talking animal to grant girls magical powers and for people to get superpowers from radiation and for some random person to become a pop sensation overnight and do u see where i’m going with this