"as a straight male, i ppbppbpttt hhptpphhptpp hpbptpphptppthpbbphbh"
"Which brings me to a sad, but true, story. Which might explain why these books sometimes, sometimes, don’t get into your hands. Because no-one tells you about them.
When Ash was first launched here in the UK, I went to a ‘meet and greet’ with a large selection of booksellers. Now these were invited to HarperCollins HQ, so were the chosen few.
I waltzed around the room, telling them how excited I was that Ash was coming out, how it delved into mythology, history and just EPIC heroicness.
Then I met a bookseller who nodded politely then said:
“I can’t see the point stocking it. We’ve no Indians in our town.”
Well, I doubt she had any hobbits either but I bet she sold a few copies of The Hobbit and Lord of The Rings in her shop."
Diversity, why we fight the good fight by Sarwat Chadda
the fact that there's not a big jamie bell fandom on tumblr continually saddens me look at this fool how could you not
You say hispanic, I say latino
Most use the words interchangeably these days, but the “hispanic” identity originated from an initiative in the 1970s to give Latin American’s in the United States a more unified voice in politics. UC Berkeley sociologist Cristina Mora talks about the positives and negatives of this distinction in her new book:
You have the person whose great-grandmother came from Argentina, but has never visited Latin America, and does not speak Spanish, lumped into the exact same category as a Guatemalan who just crossed the U.S. border. One argument the book makes is that in order for all these government, market and political interests to come together, the category had to become broader in order to fit in all these ideas about Hispanics being consumers, or Hispanics being disadvantaged people.
Over time, the Hispanic identity has become based on cultural generalities such as ‘We all love our families. We are all religious and we all have some connection to the Spanish language however far back that may be.’ That’s a weakness and a strength. It was because of that ambiguity that we have the large numbers who identify as Hispanic and who have made advances. But when you have such a broad and opaque category it’s hard to elicit and sustain passion and commitment.
Reblogging cuz I know a few people (myself included) who often get confused about the differences between the two. Also, yay for Cal grads doing good work!
YouTube comments aren’t “just the Internet.” They’re not the product of a group of otherwise nice guys who suddenly become evil when they wear a veil of anonymity. YouTube comments are actually a nightmarish glimpse into the sexist attitudes that define the fabric of our own existence in the “real world,” a world that, like YouTube, is owned and dominated by men. The most terrifying gift that the Internet has given us is that it’s shown us how men honestly perceive the world: as a place where women exist exclusively for their sexual pleasure.
In the wake of VidCon, and as more and more women start speaking up about the harassment they face online, it’s time to start realizing that our narrative of progress is deeply flawed. Things aren’t getting better for women on the Internet; they’re deteriorating and ignoring the problem amounts to being complicit in it."
— "For women on the Internet, it doesn’t get better" by Samantha Allen (via femfreq)
I've written an 86K fantasy novel and I've submitted it for publishing several places. I've received 7 rejection letters and I know that's part of the process, but now I'm wondering if I should pull back and edit AGAIN. But I've gone over the book so many times, Ive had family go over it, and honestly the idea of going through it again just to 'tweak' it seems pointless. Its finished. Its done. But I'm wondering if I should submit to peer critique? Any advice? I'm so frustrated.
Are you going straight to the publishers? Try getting an agent first. Most of them, if they want to represent you, will help fix up your manuscript if they want to make changes.
If you want to fix it up, one thing you should avoid is having friends and family read it to give feedback. You need someone who doesn’t personally know you. Family and friends can be biased with their feedback and they might be afraid to give negative criticism. So, find a beta reader.
Otherwise, here are some reasons you might have been rejected:
- Did not follow directions: Did you follow all of the submission guidelines carefully? Did you proofread your query letters and synopses? Did you send the right genre? Some people are ruthless when they come across something that does not follow the directions. They’ll delete it without a second thought.
- Too many typos: Whether it was in your manuscript or in the submission itself, too many typos or grammatical errors can lead to a rejection.
- Boring: Your submission (query letter, synopsis, other), your manuscript, or both were not attention-grabbing. If you need help writing great query letters and synopses, there are tags for both on my tags page.
- Overcrowded: Sometimes the reason for rejection is the genre. Most publishers are not taking YA dystopians right now unless they’re super original. The market is overcrowded. When there are tons of choices, the likelihood of someone picking out your particular book among tons of others is slim. Publishers need to sell books if they want to publish more. Even with literary agencies, they might have too many of one genre on their personal bookshelf at the moment.
- Submission: Something in your submission might have scared people away. Were you arrogant? Did you compare your novel to Harry Potter? Did you mention that it’s the first of 12 books (mention that it has the potential to be a series, don’t give the actual number).
- Your writing: If your writing, characters, and plot fall flat, you’ll face a rejection. If you think this is the case, keep writing and keep reading. Write something else and come back to your story in a year or so. Go through it and see how you can improve it with your new skills.
baby japanese macaques, aslo known as snow monkeys, in the joshinetsu kogen national park. located in the valley of the yokoyu river in the northern part of nagano prefecture, the areas remains relatively free of humans thanks to heavy snowfalls, an elevation of 850 meters, and being accessible only via a narrow two kilometer footpath through the forest.
With sexual offense reports on the rise among U.S. colleges, it’s becoming increasingly apparent that the battle to end rape culture must be fought among the younger generations, not their parents. This is why it’s also important to remain vigilant about the kinds of messaging disseminated by one of our most accessible forms of entertainment: the Hollywood blockbuster. Let’s take a look a few popular films over the years and analyze why they reinforce rape culture across generations.
"We don’t notice it in fairy tales either. We always teach our children that persistence is admirable and desirable and you should be willing to do anything to get the person of your dreams. It’s not going to register as a violation of consent."
Why don't you agree with that Fight Club post?
hmm, a lot of reasons.
this is the post:
so many people who are attempting to be counter-culture and progressive and liberal don’t like fight club because they think it’s an oversexed white male dominance fantasy and that’s exactly right. that’s what fight club is cutting at and making fun of
that boxy chested dudebro with the tyler durden poster in his dorm is the one the joke is on. it’s written by a queer man as a jab at over-privileged anxious 90’s white men with sexual frustration that they can only channel and expel by beating the shit out of each other
and actual stuff is happening around them, their actions have consequences, there is art and science and cancer going on around them and they wanna blow junk up and the narrator realizes this in the end and destroys that side of his personality because it went too far
that’s the punchline that’s the point of fight club y’all
and the thing is, I get it, I really really do. And it’s not wrong, that interpretation of Fight Club is totally legitimate because - Death of the Author
but here’s the thing, us saying “NO I know they think it’s about this but this is what it’s really about so it’s okay! it’s satire!”
(see also: it’s always sunny in philadelphia)
the problem with this, is that it’s not very effective satire, in fact I would say it’s very harmful satire and therefor deserves its criticism - progressive liberal bullshit or not.
Chuck Palahniuk is a white cis gay man. You cannot use his status as a gay man to say that he’s actually spinning this really elaborate joke on straight men and their masculinity. (Especially since, like, have you read his other books? Because I have read every single book he’s ever written and I invite you to do the same and examine all of his white male protagonists)
You can’t just say “Oh well he’s gay so he MUST be saying this!” that’s not how that works.
Palahniuk is certain that there are some things in life that men innately enjoy and should be given - given back - cultural permission to express. “If we try to suppress that completely, it is going to erupt in some horrible uncontrolled way. In a culture where we have condemned all forms of violence as invalid and not needed, violence still comes up. It comes up in hyper-violent ways, like in school shootings.”
The notion that men must be allowed to be men or else all society - women included - suffers, is consistent with the mantras of the American men’s movement and the mytho-poetic prescriptions of its patron saint, Robert Bly, the author of Iron John. Palahniuk also seems in sympathy with the argument that conventional manly virtues have been done down in the keyboard-driven, postindustrial economy, and he has not missed the irony that while men’s interest in violent sports today causes concern, women’s incursions into the same territory are often applauded. So when men box it is mindless violence and when women box it is liberation?
For Palahniuk the male protagonists of Fight Club are human spirits in revolt against the deadening destinies society that allots them. (x)
this interview also starts with the headline: “The writer of Fight Club thinks that men need to reclaim masculinity - with their fists. But, Dave Hill finds, he’s really just a softie at heart”
And again, death of the author is a thing but the other thing is, men are not made uncomfortable by Fight Club. They aren’t. Which was the original argument, that Fight Club s clever because it is a satire of violent heteronormative masculinity that actually makes men uncomfortable BUT IT DOESN’T. It empowers them, it reinforces them. And I can tell you this from experience.
When I was in college, I took a class on “literary sabotage”, taught by a straight white man in his 40s, and the class breakdown was about 80% white straight men. (I know right). We read about 8 books, all written by white men. Palahniuk was the only gay author.
Now I had to sit in this class and listen as every single male - including my professor - talked about how great Fight Club is because it finally gives men of the late-20th and early-21st centuries a forum to vent about the frustrations of masculinity. Without a single trace of irony. And the satirical aspect? was not only ignored but violently rebuked when someone (another woman) brought it up. It made them angry. And if you brought up the homoerotic undertones of the novel? It was laughed off and waved away. “It’s just men being intimate in their most primal sates - it’s something women can’t understand, it’s not gay" - actual thing my actual classmate said. And it’s backed up! by what Palahniuk says!
So I wrote a paper, more or less exactly like what this tumblr post says, only with quotes and stuff from Palahniuk with the argument that he lost control of his own pet project and it actually should be taken as satire, intended or not. And I got a C-. In four years of college, and 4 years of high school, I got something other than a B or an A on a paper. And I’m not so full of myself that I don’t think I can get a C-, that’s not what I’m saying, but this paper had no actual markings or corrections on it. Just A C-, with no explanation. While every single male in my class got As and Bs and pages full of positive commentary. I wonder what they wrote about.
So. yeah, that’s my issue with it.god this all of this don't trust a guy who unironically says he loves fight club ive read like four palahniuk books and trust me like its very easy to overlook his so called satire he's just a typical white male author also when the movie came out there was this rash of high school and college boy fight clubs popping up everywhere and they said the movie/book inspired them and police literally didn't know what to do a bunch of dudes were just randomly beating on each other and the author acted all horrified and was like that was not my intention yeah really? you should of thought of that before you wrote the book
i love you but i would also replace you in the avengers with lady thor in the blink of an eye sorry chris it's complicated chris hemsworth
I’m still honestly disappointed that after
- we’ve been given pretty irrefutable proof by actual Saami people that Frozen has presented a whitewashed/mishmashed version of Saami culture
- we’ve been given an example of how Kristoff could have easily been a MoC
- it was pointed out repeatedly that Frozen doesn’t have PoCs (a freeze frame of a woman standing waaay in the background who may be black doesn’t count), despite also having proof that yes, PoCs did in fact exist in Denmark, the area Arendelle is apparently supposed to represent (never mind the fact that again, it’s a completely fictional place)
after all that, ABC’s Once Upon a Time had a chance to fix some of these points when they announced they’d be including the Frozen characters in the show
like they literally could have reasonably cast at least Kristoff as a man of color, but the creative team made a very conscious decision to just…not do thatfrozen frozen on ouat frozen criticism ouat wank frozen wank thiscouldhavebeenfrozen medievalpoc selchieproductions whitewashing diversity saami imean lbr they could all be pocs SINCE ARENDELLE IS NOT A REAL PLACE STORYBROOK IS NOT A REAL PLACE FAIRYTALES ARE JUST THAT THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TO REPEATEDLY JUSTIFY WHY SOMEONE CAN BE SOMETHING OTHER THAN A WHITE SALTINE CRACKER IS AMAZING TO ME THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TO EXPLAIN WHY WE SHOULD EXIST IN FICTION I MEAN JUST THINK ABOUT HOW SAD THAT IS disney wank