Wednesday, 31 August 2016

Sapphic Media

I'm not an expert on media representation. I also don't know many shows that have diverse representation, unless we're talking about the sapphic stuff. I know about that. But also I don't know everything? So chances are I have missed a lot. 

wlw = women loving women
sapphic = woman who loves women
lesbian = woman who exclusively loves women
bisexual / pansexual / polysexual / queer / asexual / demisexual / greysexual women may be wlw
wlw is not exclusive to sexual attraction, it also included romantic attraction.

Movies

A lot of these might be in foreign languages, so if you're fluent, great, otherwise there will be subtitled versions floating around the net somewhere.
Also, I haven't necessarily watched all of these, so I can't vouch for them (y'know given that 'bury your gays' trope, and 'don't let the gays be happy,' ugh.)

Source:

http://sapphostication.tumblr.com/post/72130771275/an-extensive-list-of-queer-lady-movies-for-my 

Romance

Imagine Me & You 

RomComs

Kyss Mig (Kiss Me)
The Four-Faced Liar
The Incredibly True Adventure of Two Girls in Love
Saving Face
Nina's Heavenly Delights
Yes or No
I Can't Think Straight
Heavenly Delights

"funny-shit"

D.E.B.S
But I'm A Cheerleader
Itty Bitty Titty Committee
Puccini For Beginners

Action / Thriller / Mystery

The Hunger
Bound
Kill For Me
Chloe
Cracks
The Moth Diaries
Affinity

Period & Historical Dramas

The Secret Diaries of Miss Anne Lister
Fingersmith (this one has two parts)
Tipping The Velvet
The Night Watch
Viola di Mare (The Sea Purple)
Farewell, My Queen
The Girl King (!!!)

"Caution: Extremely Hot"

Bloomington
A Perfect Ending
Elena Undone
When Night is Falling
Room in Rome
Joven y Alocada (Yound and Wild)

Dramas

Circumstance
Loving Annabelle
Gia
La Vie d'Adèle - Chapitres 1 & 2 (Blue is the Warmest Colour)
Aimee amd Jaguar

Teen-Centric

Lost and Delirious
Fucking Amal (Show Me Love)
Naissance des Pieuvres (Water Lillies)
My Summer of Love
Pariah

Trans-women

En Soap (Soap)
Laurence Anyways

The One's You've Probably Never Heard Of

Gigola
Bye Bye Blondie
Ha-Sadot (The Secrets)
The World Unseen (!!!)
Eloise's Lover

Web-Series

Carmilla
The Last Life
The 'Other' Love Story

Short Films

I was really in to watching these when I was like 14, so I don't really remember what they were called, or which ones in the YouTube search were any good. 
 
The Not Bucket List
Lovestruck
Truth Or Drink
Blooming
Warpaint (!!!)
We Will
Practical Things

Television

Some of these may contain toxic storylines, and queer character deaths. Maybe do a quick search of like "lgbt death X show" to see, because as of writing this there have been some deaths in this list, but also some shows where its ambiguous as to whether a sapphic character will or won't die.
 
The L Word (#Classic)
The Fosters (!!!)
Sense8
Orange is the New Black
Orphan Black
Person of Interest
Wentworth
The 100 (Yes, I'm including it, just stop about 10 minutes before the end of 307)
Wynonna Earp
South of Nowhere
Pretty Little Liars

Music

Sources:

http://www.pride.com/music/2015/08/20/20-music-videos-lesbian-imagery-sweetest-most-exploitative
https://www.buzzfeed.com/skarlan/need-more-music-always?utm_term=.ulVQJAWPk#.xlKYZ7WB2

Songs

  • Some are by wlw artists, others are not.
  • Some of the songs are specifically about wlw, some of them just the music video is.
  • I hope none of these are of offensive nature, I haven't checked them all. Sorry.
Also, I haven't included everything from the sources. Just check out the sources too.

Avicii - Addicted to You
Hayley Kiyoko (WLW artist)- Cliff's Edge, Girls Like Girls, Gravel To Temp πŸ’–πŸ’–πŸ’–
Halsey (bisexual artist) - Ghost (Room 93 EP)  😍😍😍
Tegan & Sara (#Classic)
Mary Lambert - She Keeps Me Warm
The Head And The Heart - Another Story
Radical Something - Pure
Tove Lo - Timebomb
Demi Lovato - Cool For The SUmmer
Melissa Ethridge - I Want To Be In Love
Ellektra - I Don't Do Boys
Lowell - LGBT

Playlist

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pFKtB7L4LQ&list=PLoZbfyrDcmAlhKKZn5Cq8LC4FVJBWI0YG&index=47 

My Playlist





 

 

The Flopdred



If you have spoken to me, ever, you probably know I have quite strong opinions / feelings about The CW's show: The 100. You may also know that this show, whilst seemingly incredibly progressive a few months ago, in the span of about 3 episodes, became the most horrifying network show for minority representation.

So, The 100... Here's the low down. Basically, this event has become so much more than "just a TV show." It has become a movement for nontoxic LGBT representation in media.
For more information, which is where I have copied a lot of the text in this post from, visit:
A webpage directly in response to The 100:
http://wedeservedbetter.com/
Or, their partner webpage, which highlights the broader issue:
http://lgbtfansdeservebetter.com/

Head’s up: This is about 3000 words, but I cover pretty much everything, from what happened, why it's bad (including statistics), and what we can, and are, doing to make change.

<< Content / Trigger Warnings >>
LGBT death, POC death, SH/Suicide, Torture, Violence

<< What triggered the outcry: >>
"The tipping point was the unnecessary death of Lexa (Alycia Debnam-Carey) on The 100, a series on the CW Network which caters to genre shows and teen audiences. Since the airing of episode 3×07 on March 3rd, 2016, forums and social media outlets have been flooded with outcry over the mishandling of a beloved fictional character who served as a beacon in the lives of many young LGBT and non-LGBT persons. In that episode Lexa – the powerful and openly lesbian leader of the show’s post-apocalyptic society – had just consummated her long-simmering relationship with the show’s protagonist Clarke Griffin. In the very next scene (64 seconds later), Lexa was accidentally shot dead by a stray bullet intended for her lover."

<< Some statistics: >>
"Lesbians are not unfamiliar with dying—and dying violently—in the media. An alarming 31% of lesbian or bisexual characters on American scripted TV shows between 1976-2016 ended up dead. A further 38% were simply guest characters or written off with no resolution, whilst only 10% got a “happy ending”. With the list of dead lesbian/bisexual characters now at 152 (and counting), LGBT fans demand better from media creators."
This is compared to the "26 lesbian and bisexual characters who got happy endings."
Source: http://www.autostraddle.com/all-26-lesbian-and-bisexual-tv-characters-who-got-happy-endings-331601/
Source for dead count: http://www.autostraddle.com/all-65-dead-lesbian-and-bisexual-characters-on-tv-and-how-they-died-312315/
"as of tonight with the lesbian couple from empire dying, here is the list of lesbian and bi women characters killed on tv in the first just over 3 months of 2016
zora - the shannara chronicles
carla - code black
julie - mao the expanse
rose - jane the virgin
ashleigh - janet king
lexa - the 100
kira - the magicians
denise - the walking dead
nora and mary louise - the vampire diaries
mimi and camilla - empire
that’s 12. in just over 3 months. this report (http://www.glaad.org/files/GLAAD-2015-WWAT.pdf ) from 2015 says there were 35 lesbian or bi women characters on television. so far in the first quarter of 2016, over one-third of them have been killed off."
Source: http://universequartz.tumblr.com/post/142386269243/as-of-tonight-with-the-lesbian-couple-from-empire


<< What was so bad about Lexa's death? >>
"Many fans expected Lexa to appear in a limited number of episodes due to the fact that Debnam-Carey is a cast regular in AMC’s Fear the Walking Dead. However, they were led to believe, over the course of a year, that the character wouldn’t be killed off, that they could have hope, and that this show would make an effort to avoid known tropes and mistakes in telling Lexa’s story. The message sent out by the showrunner was that this show was different, groundbreaking and progressive, that they loved the character, and – most importantly – that CW and AMC were able to work out a good deal that would allow Debnam-Carey to continue her work on The 100."
This plays into a concept called queer-baiting: wherein you promise positive representation for the LGBT community, but don't deliver. And this is obviously an extremely toxic mechanism to utilize against an already vulnerable community.
You can go check out the receipts on the webpage for just how far this queer baiting went. But it went as far as one of the writers going into queer safe spaces, and saying (paraphrased) "if you don't trust that we wont kill Lexa by now, then you need therapy."


<< Who is Jason? >>
Jason Rothenberg is the showrunner of The 100, this means he gets to make all final decisions regarding everything. He is directly responsible for this. But he refuses to take responsibility, and instead defends his decision to have killed Lexa. We all hate Jason.
<< But shouldn't we blame the writers? They wrote her death. >>
Yes, but the death was Jason's idea. Some of the writers have been extremely supportive, and apologetic after episode 307. Javi has been exceptionally sincere. Kim? Well... It really depends what day. Shauna? Absolutely horrible. She's the one who was going into queer safe spaces... (To be honest with you, I don't know how many more writers there are. But these three all have a really big online presence with the fans.)


<< The cast? >>
Leave them out of it. They are bound by contracts. But have for the most part, sided with the fandom, as opposed to Jason.
But they can't do much, for risk of ruining their careers. Ricky Whittle literally had to leave his job on The 100 because of the bullying he was experiencing on The 100. (I'll talk about Lincoln's death later.) And Lindsey Morgan's character, Raven, has also experiences horrible treatment, which I will discuss.


<< Can this show redeem itself? >>
No. The show has toyed with concepts of immortality, afterlives, and reincarnation, but bringing back the dead, does nothing to fix how wrong it was to kill them so unjustly in the first place. Especially, given that the showrunner has shown no remorse, and any "progressive" changes in the future would only be attempts to regain ratings. We won't be used again.


<< So how bad is it? >>
Really bad. We were used [for ratings.] We were given false hope. We doubted for so long, could it be real? Were we really going to see powerful women-loving-women (wlw) on our television screens, and not have it end in tragedy? We didn't believe it. But then, Jason made a tweet late last year, inviting fans to the set where they were filming the finale, and low-and-behold, Alycia DC was there, and her character was seemingly very much alive. We believed him. And then it was ripped from us, brutally, by way of an overused and (historically) very harmful trope, of "bury your gays." (Which I'm to believe was once a propagandist slogan, that was used to bully and teach fear to the LGBT+ community, by showing their representation as evil and wrong and deserving of death.)
But //how// bad you may ask? What do you think happens when you destroy the only hope of young queer people? I have witnessed the online devastation. I have seen stories of people reverting to self harm. I have read suicide notes. (Note: If any of you have seen Chloe Clark's, it is false. She is alive. Someone [abusive] in her family wrote it.) I don't think this world understands how vulnerable the LGBT community is; how vulnerable the youth are.
But if anything, by now the world should understand the impact of media, and the affect that constantly killing us has on screen, in reality.

<< What are we doing about it? >>
Firstly, we are doing everything in a power to reveal the true nature of the show. This means down voting it on platforms such as IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes. It means not watching live, or on official networks. It means not tweeting using official tags. It means reaching out to publications for coverage. (You can find a list of articles regarding this issue, on the sites I linked at the start.) We have been recognised by some really major outlets; most recently Forbes. This isn’t just a dead character. This is a revolution (or as some have termed: queervolution, but I understand not everyone is uncomfortable with the word “queer.”)
We are reaching out to sponsors of the show (the companies that advertise during it.) Target and Maybelline have already pulled their sponsorship.
But perhaps our biggest accomplishment, is in under a month we raised over $100k for The Trevor Project, the only national (US) organization providing suicide prevention services to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning youth in crisis. The Trevor Project serves more than 100,000 LGBTQ youth every year with their life-saving programs that include the Trevor Lifeline, TrevorChat, Ask Trevor and TrevorSpace.

<< What can you do? >>
Every week there is an official twitter trend, organised by wedeservedbetter and lgbtfansdeservebetter. Jump on twitter, during the airing of The 100 (9|8c Thursday), which is a bit after midday on Friday for us, and post as many tweets as you can, that include the trend, with any relevant information. Keep it respectful and educational.
You can also write and send emails to sponsors, asking them to revoke their sponsorship of the show. I believe, there is a list of sponsors and contact details, as well as [maybe] an exemplar letter on one of the sites.

<< You mentioned another death earlier? >>
I did. Lincoln. Now this hasn’t sprouted as big of a movement, that I am aware of, but it certainly deserves one. I think the reasoning for the lack of it being that our resources are focussed elsewhere. But the brutal death of people of colour is just as terrible. Lincoln was one of the purest souls in The 100 universe. He was raised in the harsh “grounder” environment, yet still turned out to be a gentle and loving person. But Lincoln was never treated well on the show, right from the beginning. His scenes included being whipped and tortured. Being turned into a raging zombie.  Dying. Being brought back to life. Being outcast by his own people, and then the people who gave him refuge. And then dying again. His death wasn’t so bad, the FIRST time. It was only for a few seconds, before he was hit by a high voltage and brought back. The second time though, after he willingly surrendered to save his friends, he was publicly executed, and his body was left in the mud. The very episode after Lexa’s death. That’s two minorities unnecessarily killed by harmful tropes.
This was a horrendous atrocity, especially given the treatment of black men in the modern world. Remember Ferguson? The violence and xenophobia never ended. It’s not okay to casually show it on television, like it is “just another dead body.” It’s not.

<< What about the other character? Raven? >>
Raven represents several minorities. She is a girl in a STEM field, she is Latina, and she is disabled. Raven wasn’t disabled in the beginning though. That took a bullet to her spine to disable the use of one of her legs. Raven has also been strung up and publicly tortured. She has been tied down and tortured. It doesn’t sound like it could get much worse for Raven. I mean, she took one of the magical happiness pills, despite her better judgement, to free herself of her pain. But if got worse. (These magical happiness pills are actually keys for an evil Artificial Intelligence to gain access to your mind, thus removing all your pain, and bad memories.) But Raven snapped out of it. She realised losing her pain, wasn’t worth losing her memories. She figured out how to get the AI out of her head. The AI didn’t like this, thus removing itself, and returning all of Raven’s pain at once; more torture. The AI then came back and said “I can make it better.” Raven gave in, and the AI started using Raven to manipulate those who cared about her into submitting, including causing Raven to attempt suicide. I think you understand how bad this is.

<< I’ve heard about a guy called Bellamy. >>
This is a sensitive topic. Bellamy fans are pretty intense, very loyal. Bellamy didn’t start out so great in season 1, but he had some amazing character development in the second season, which was all tossed away in the third season, when he became coleader of a hate movement.

<< Isn’t Bellamy a person of character? >>
This is a controversial topic. Bob Morley, who portrays Bellamy, is half Filipino, and therefore a POC. However, something called “white-washing” is going on, where-in an actor’s ethnicity is ignored, in order to make their character white. Bellamy’s sister, Octavia, is in fact white, and so was their mother. It is in fact possible they had different fathers, hence Bellamy being a POC. However, in flashbacks, little Bellamy was portrayed by a white actor, giving reason to believe, that Bellamy is supposed to be white, but again, this is a controversial topic.

<< Are all the minority representations in the show tortured and killed? >>
No. The others are villainized.

<< If it’s such a bad show, why do you still watch it? >>
It’s called addiction, darling. No, but in all seriousness. I keep watching because I am emotionally invested in the characters. Clarke, Lexa’s love interest, and the main character, is bisexual, and badass. Raven is incredibly smart. And Octavia is unbelievably kickass. The actors do a phenomenal job of bringing their characters to life. Especially Lindsey.

<< It sounds like it has always been a bad show… >>
You are absolutely right. The issue is, so many of us were so blinded by the possibility of positive lesbian representation, that we ignored the struggles of the people of colour characters, and disabled. We accept that that was wrong of us. We campaigned so heavily for this third season, to see our beloved Lexa more. But this isn’t our fault. It’s Jason’s. We were silent when we shouldn’t have been. But we didn’t kill them, or torture them. Jason did.

<< I read all of this. >>
I hope you learned something. I hope you understand why I won’t stop talking about. I hope you understand how harmful tropes like “bury your gays” are. I hope you are sympathetic to this cause. I hope you understand that this issue is bigger than just “The 100” and encompasses all forms of media, and the homophobic attitudes ingrained in it. I hope you understand that the LGBT community are fighting for more than just a TV character. We are fighting for ourselves, to stop having the idea that we should die, perpetuated by films and television.

<< Why haven’t I heard about this before? >>
I don’t know. It’s a pretty big deal. We are getting some really amazing coverage. We are making change.

<< The future… >>
So, what are we going to do to make this a full-on revolution? Keep up the media hype, keep up twitter trends, all the stuff I mentioned earlier. The leaders of this movement, who run those webpages, are arranging to advertise our movement on billboards near the CW and WB studies in LA. They can’t keep ignoring us.
We won’t see change for a while. 2016 has been a bad year. But it has already been written, filmed, edited. But as new content is created and aired, we hope to see change, but we can’t be certain, we can’t hide behind blind faith. We won’t let hope make fools of us again. We will keep fighting.

<< Where can I watch LGBT characters NOT die? >>
So, I saw that list of dead wlw characters and their respective shows, and that list of 120+ dead lesbians.
Where can I see good representation?
Honestly, I am tired right now. I am not an expert.
This is the only list I know off the top of my head:
7 Lesbian Films That Actually Gave Us Happily Ever After
Personally, I would also recommend Sense8, on Netflix. It has lesbian characters, gays, trans, people of colour… Really good show.


<< Disclaimer >>
I don’t claim to be an expert. I apologize if I get some things wrong. I also don’t know enough about all the other shows whose audiences have experiences similar trauma to Leksakru and Clexakru.




Mother

Trigger Warnings/Content Warnings: I'm not sure what applies as triggers, but I'm going to talk about different minorities, and their treatment in the media, as well as people who are isolated by situations of abuse, etc. So if you have any triggers that may fit in, maybe just Ctrl+f and search the document to see if that word pops up (it will say "showing 1 of x results"), and if not, all good, otherwise, avoid. :)

Representation is important for two reasons:
1. to shape the way we think about ourselves
2. to shape the way other people think about us

Representation, usually, is discussed in terms of populace demographics, i.e. portrayal of minority groups in media. These include: people from across all races, cultures, ethnicity; people of varying religions and spiritual practices; people who identify as non-heterosexual, and/or non-cisgender and/or non-monogamous (typically generalized as queer or lgbt+, honestly there are way too many labels to list, given that all have their own spectrums); people who identify as neurodivergent, mentally ill; people with physical disabilities, or chronic illnesses; people of varying body types; people of different ages; women; and people from different social classes.

And whilst it's incredibly important to focus on portraying these stories with accuracy, and consulting people from the groups your trying to represent, as well as casting those demographics for the roles, and fluidly including minorities, without drawing too much attention, or making a mockery of, their "otherness" and making the story about their "otherness" in a way that takes away from focusing on their actual situation within the story, and the impact the story has on them, it is also important to be explicit in a way.

By explicit, I mean, make it known that that character is biracial, or that character is autistic, or that character is queer, don't leave everything up to "interpretation."

And now, I want to take the focus away from populace demographics and focus on situations.
These include, alcoholism, drug addiction, rape victims, wrongly convicted criminals, people who are facing discrimination because of their "otherness", victims of violence, victims of physical abuse, victims of emotional/psychological abuse, victims of verbal abuse, victims of sexual abuse, etc.

This is going to seem like a jump, but with all that explained, I want to turn over to children.

Children are incredibly impressionable. Childhood is also when we develop a lot of the principles and values we maintain for the rest of our lives. So it's really important to include positive representation and messages in children's media.

But even more than including it, it's important that it's executed in such a way that children understand.

A lot of children don't read cues as easily as adults, and don't make inferences as well (learning inferential comprehension is in fact a major part of the education system because it's not something that develops as naturally). This is largely why Thomas the Tank Engine (Thomas & Friends, I'm not really sure what it is actually called) is hugely popular with very young children, and often autistic children. The large, extremely emotive faces are very easy to read and understand. Reading social cues, and facial expressions is honestly difficult, and requires a lot of experience, intuition, and understanding of emotion.

The point is, subtly including something isn't always adequate. Sometimes the implicit message won't reach children, and they will only see the dominant message. i.e. think of the idiom "don't cry over spilled milk," to children this will probably just be accepted as a principle of life, that if they spill their glass of milk, they are not to cry. But it's only those who have adequate inferential comprehension who will realise that it means don't panic when something minor goes wrong, or don't over-react.

Now, children are super impressionable, so they will probably believe what you tell them in preference over their own conclusions. However, often children are do draw inferences, and shutting them down, in preference of enforcing "literal" or "preferred" interpretations, you strip them of their independence.

I want to talk about Disney's Tangled. And the psychological (and physical, I guess?) abuse of Rapunzel by Mother Gothel.

Now, I remember watching this in the theatre with my mother and sister, and to anyone who has seen the film, they know Mother Gothel is evil. She kidnaps Rapunzel, locks her in a tower, with very little resources for mental stimulation, isolates her, and forces her to keep her maintain a standard of personal presentation (i.e. keep her hair nice), and forces her to sing to her, all the while convincing Rapunzel that she is a good mother, who does this in her best interests, and loves her, and makes Rapunzel feel wrong for wanting to leave or have other experiences. THIS IS AN ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIP.

However, in some aspects we are made to pity Mother Gothel, such as showing that this flower was her only source of life, and it was taken from her and given to a baby. We are shown a way to empathise with the abuser. Most of us wont. We relate to the princess in the tower, the classic fairytale idol. But whilst children do not identify or pity mother gothel, as she is indeed framed as the villain, they can be convinced to. They can be convinced that the kind of behaviour demonstrated by Mother Gothel is not abuse and is in fact a healthy parent-child relationship.

For instance, I remember sitting in the theatre when "Mother Knows Best" started, and as soon as that line was said, my mother turned to me and my sister and said "Listen up girls."

As an almost-adult (I turn 18 in about 3 months) who has many friends in similar situations to myself, I know a lot about the struggle of psychological abuse.

Namely, it feels really wrong to call it that. "Abuse."
Abuse victims are told that they are wrong to feel hurt. They are told there is nothing wrong with the treatment they are receiving. They are over-sensitive, weak, selfish, petty, and oh boy, do the labels get worse when you actually call it out.

But being constantly told you are unappreciative of your abuser's affections, or that you are a disappointment, are selfish cow, weak, etc, all that, is really damaging.

And by normalizing abuse, and being told that's how it is,  makes it really hard to escape, because victims are so conflicted about whether there actually is something to escape from, as well as the complexity of having someone "keep you hostage."

So when you have a children's movie show this relationship, and never have anyone call it out as abuse, or anyone else point out what is abusive, or what to do when you are being abuse, you make victims complacent, and still provide an outlet for abusers to justify themselves.

Sometimes it can be weaved in by a simple 2 second seen of a teacher telling her students on the first day of class, "if anything is difficult at home, if you're having trouble with your parents, you are always welcome to talk to me," because "difficulty" and "trouble" can include internal-conflict, so it doesn't apply a label like "abuse" that immediately makes people avoid, and it also teaches children that their teachers are safety nets that they can talk to.

That's just one example.

It can also be done by trigger warnings. These are really popular on the internet, but super uncommon in published, broadcasted and cinematic items of media.

Why? A number of reasons. A lot of people think trigger warnings are necessary because it's "bubble-wrapping" i.e. over-protecting us.

But a lot of people are more concerned about spoilers.
It's a valid point. (Not that being able to maintain the element surprise is more important than helping someone avoid a panic attack or assault.)

Here's some options: have cinema's include trigger warnings in the descriptions on their webpages. Have television broadcasters included it in the digital descriptions in the guides,  have books include it on the page under dedications.

But just warning isn't enough.

It's also important that influencers of public opinion and actions, which include all of mainsteam media, include helplines, and information about what constitutes the negative situation, steps to get out of it, and what you can do if you are in that situation, or see someone in that situation.

I was pleasantly surprised last year, after watching an episode of Reign on The CW to find that this message was aired immediately following the episode, it's in no way a warning, but it does offer assistance to victims of sexual assault:


I really hope I've conveyed my point eloquently enough that it can be understood.
But to summarise:
  • Representation of different groups is important
  • Representation influences opinions we have of ourselves and others, which influences how we act, behave and feel   
  • It's important to have accurate representation, that doesn't focus inherently on the "otherness" as the defining trait of that person, (sometimes this is okay, but usually its not) 
  • Representation of people in difficult situations is important
  • It's important to be explicit
  • It's important to have trigger warnings
  • It's important to demonstrate methods of identifying difficult situations
  • It's important to demonstrate methods of coping with difficult situations
  • It's important to demonstrate methods of recovering from, or escaping difficult situations
  • It's important to include these representations in children's media
  • Children are highly impressionable and vulnerable
  • Children can also fit "other" demographics and be subject to difficult situations
  • Children don't have the same inferential comprehension skills as typical adults
  • Children's media needs to be explicit (I mean direct, not that kind of explicit, geez) 
  • It's important to provide children with systems of support

Disclaimer: If anything in here is factually inaccurate, or offensive, please let me know.
Commenting can be anonymous, and as a PSA, for the Name/URL option, it is not necessary to fill in the URL box. :)



Thursday, 3 March 2016

Strangers. Acquaintances. Friends. Strangers.

Everyday, thousands of strangers meet unfamiliar eyes. Sometimes they bump shoulders and apologize, sometimes they hold the door for each other and exchange shy, awkward smiles. Every now and then, these strangers becomes acquaintances, or friends, or maybe more.

You usually know, after the first or second time you meet someone, whether or not you will get along, or sometimes it takes a little longer, perhaps, after your first visit to their house where you stumble upon their collection of beastiality-related sex toys. The point is, it's usually early in the acquainting process that you decide whether or not you want to pursue a relationship, whether it be friendly or otherwise.

However, sometimes this moment doesn't come until years down the track. Perhaps, you knew this person from the freckles on their elbows, to the story where they tripped walking up the stairs at their high school graduation. You knew them and they knew you. And maybe, you trusted them. And maybe, they were honourable. But more time passes and slowly you are worn down, and there are too many times where you should have realized the relationship wasn't meant to be, you see that in retrospect.

Suddenly, you can't stand the way they tap music on the table when they're happy, or how nonchalant they are towards physical affection (oblivious to your discomfort), or the fact that they become infatuated by the ever-changing colour of your fingernails (so you stop painting them), or the way tut-tut at you for insisting on taking the time to make home-made pizzas for games-night when it would have been more efficient to just get it delivered. It's little things like that, which slowly wear you down.

It's not that any of those behaviours are bad, per say, it's just that they affect you. In the same way that some people get chills down their spine when you scratch a blackboard, or don't like pumpkin. It's personal preference.

Maybe you're whole life you have been completely unfazed by clowns but all it takes is one unsettling horror film and suddenly kid's birthday parties make you want to run and hide.

And when you come to this realization; it's scary. You try to figure out how it all fell apart; if it's possible to still build a sculpture from the ruins, if perhaps it was you with a chisel and hammer, slowly chipping away at the relationship, or if it was them, or the weather, with it's acid rain, corroding it away.

In the end, you'll discover that relationships are not always permanent; people come and go. You have left people wounded, too, and maybe you hadn't known either. That won't change the fact that it still hurts, the emotional loss of someone. And is the pain temporary, too? I don't know.

Saturday, 27 February 2016

Gap in Humanity

07.02.2016

I don't even know if there is a point to this piece. 

The strange thing about modern culture is that it is progressing at such an unfathomable rate that we are oblivious to the extremities of change that surround us. We remember the days of cassettes and box televisions like pages from an history textbooks, memories of past lives, foreign to our contemporary eyes; overwhelmed by this age of digital enlightenment. Our elders frown on the millennials they raised, as we are consumed by pixels and wireless frequencies. They forget that they too were frowned on when they welcomed electrical telephones and home radio; as though there is a difference between the block that was mounted on their walls and the feather-light bricks we hold in our hands. That somehow, hiding behind books and magazines contrasts to the reflection of our Facebook feeds on our pupils.

It's been said that since humans domesticated themselves, they have brought the evolution of our species to a stalemate. I cannot believe that. Surely the past millennium stands as testament to its falsehood. Our lifespans have doubled, we have created vaccines and treatments. We have granted breath to the recently deceased. We have built walls that withstand hurricanes, machines that detect terror before it hits. You cannot call that a stalemate, when we are conquering what was previously unimaginable. We have made ourselves stronger in the face of constant doubt. And still we are doubted, by the possessors of balding heads, scattered with wiry gray hairs, on frail builds, bent over shaky limbs, with eyes buried in folds of leathered skin; who dispute our choice to catalyse transformation. We have taken change into our own hands and are moving so fast that their eyes cannot keep up. We welcome technological "enslavement." They think we are weak. But we are not the slaves. We are the creators; the masters. But perhaps, there is no difference.

We have always been preached that the future rests in our hands. I suppose, the preachers never imagined the future as electrical circuits and high definition screen. The ability to transmit a message half-way across the globe, in less than time than would be taken to speak it; is nothing short of revolutionary; deserving of praise. But this is only the tip of the iceberg, and what's below the surface is only limited by our imagination. The scope of what we as humans can achieve is infinite. We will change the world in ways we cannot yet comprehend. We already have changed it.

Now, only the great moral question stands; if what we are doing is good? We make mistakes, and we patch them. But some mistakes cannot be undone. We have the nuclear power to obliterate ourselves, our planet. Can we be trusted with the power we could acquire? Can we be trusted with the power we already have?
I suppose, though, that if we cannot be trusted, we don't really deserve our accomplishments. If we ever cross that line, our fall will be just.

Perhaps, our elders are right to have doubts? We will either conquer or destroy the Earth, and thus far we haven't made a promising impression; with our wars and governance systems that turn us against each other, putting bullets in the knees of imaginary enemies. Some of the things we've done are too atrocious for redemption.

We're already complacent to the power we possess; blind to the beatings of our hearts. We are growing cold.

I suppose, it's rather ignorant to generalise an entire species. And perhaps that shall be the greatest war; the one as old as time, the one fought between ourselves, for earth, for freedom, for equality and peace, or the one for power and control, and system. Ultimately, the nature of this war depends on the lead. Shall it be a peaceful exchange, a transformation of the human spirit; or shall it be forced, with guns and threats?


We read classic novels; words describing the laugh that bubbles in a girl's throat. spilling over her tongue at the most inhumerous of consequences, and we are left to wonder how romanticized was the conversation, or was she truly touched by her encounters? Because nowadays, you crack a punchlines and are met by slightly exaggerated exhalations and muttered "lol"s underbreath. We are apathetic to our own understandings and I wonder if it's because our elders have worn down our hopes for the world, smothered us in their opinions until our own livelihoods could no longer breathe or if we have simply grown bored of concrete walls and glowing screens, that the absence of green-life in our peripheral has caused us to forget that we too are alive? Or perhaps we have grown so accustomed to drastic change and radicalism that nothing surprises us anymore. We are numb to the possibility of excitement. Our feelings have become a scale of grey tones, that even disappointment washes over us like a brief drizzle.

We're living a dream, and maybe that is why it doesn't feel real.