Discover Top Posts Tagged with #its problematic

The thing is that between stanning Jared Leto (years ago) and Misha Collins (now) I have predominantly had affection for chronically online celebrity men so at some level you could say I was (am!) having visions in which they are talking to me and those visions are real

#pls don't come to me about jared leto #its problematic

Girl, help. There are two wolves fighting inside me, and one of them is shipping Bucky with Zemo.

Brain, are u ok?

#its problematic #tfatws #why

Some thoughts on The Stand, 2021 version on Amazon Prime. There’s spoilers, but dammit the book was released ages ago so buckle up.

I haven’t finished the series yet, I have two episodes left. But this was burning my fingertips so I had to type it out.

I read The Stand by Stephen King back in the late ‘80′s. It was released in 1978 and re-released somewhere around 1990 as an ‘uncut’ edition. The editor had decided to trim the book so it could sell better. My mom looked at the uncut version and said, “If the editor cut 150,000 words, there’s probably a reason.” I agreed with her - Stephen King’s best work was his novellas, not his long novels.

A television series was released in 1994. I thought it was earlier because the character Randall Flagg has a mullet, but nope, IMDB tells me that the above date is correct.

I remember most of the details of the book and series, although the series helped me to see the final battle properly. King didn’t describe it in a way I could understand at all and was confused until the show came out. I felt similar when reading The Handmaid’s Tale. I had no idea what the costume looked like and those hats were nothing like what I imaged from Atwood’s work. I try to keep these examples in mind while writing my own novel.

So when this new iteration of The Stand appeared on my radar, I made a point of watching it. But, alas, there are some problems.

1. Nadine must remain a virgin until she can meet up with Randall. Really? It’s 2021. A person’s virtue is not determined by the use of equipment between their legs. How does remaining a virgin make someone virtuous? Why is she allowed to participate in any other sexual act but not penetration? And why does this only apply to women? Is a man’s virtue intact if he doesn’t insert his penis into someone? No! Why? This also tangles the issue of nonbinary people. What if a woman has a penis but hasn’t used it? Is she virtuous? If a man with a vagina hasn’t used the equipment, is he virtuous? Does this stem from the ancient, outdated idea that people with penises masturbate because they ‘can’t help it’ and people with vaginas don’t because they ‘can help it’?

This might have been okay in 1978, but that was 43 years ago. I need to pause here and clutch my aging heart because I can remember 1978. Whew! Okay.

This virtue bit is core to the show because Nadine must carry Randall’s child. But I feel like this could’ve been tweaked to better represent the times. Especially since the book takes place in the future, not present.

2. Las Vegas features rampant sex. This, in and of itself, doesn’t bother me. I’ve watched Netflix and HBO. I’ve seen sex, both integral to the plot and gratuitous. What bothered me was twofold:

A) The sex featured was public (in a nightclub, but still public) and people wore what could be described as BDSM gear. Lots of belts, black leather, fishnet stockings, lingerie, that kind of thing. This bothered me because they’re portraying ‘nightclub sex’ as something that ‘sinners’ do.

These people are in Las Vegas, on Randall’s side, therefore are the antagonists to the plot. Randall represents the Devil, where Mother Abigail in Boulder represents God. So people who enjoy public sex in a safe environment are sinners? In 2021? Similar question, so people who enjoy BDSM are sinners? In 2021?

B) The implication that if this kind of sex is allowed in Las Vegas, it wouldn’t be in Boulder. There, people have ‘vanilla’ sex, right? Not much is featured, but what is (or what I noticed) was hetero sex. I don’t recall seeing any poly couples in Boulder, or same-sex couples there. Why not? If they are there, why aren’t they more obvious? I tend to notice and am thrilled whenever I see nonbinary people in relationships or two men holding hands, but I didn’t notice it in Boulder.

3. There's a whole lotta white people. Other skin tones were sprinkled in, but not in the quantity I’ve become accustomed to. Since the diversity rider appeared for Canadian shows, I’ve noticed a much wider range of actors and it’s been delightful. I love seeing a First Nations person played by a First Nations actor. I love that I’m shown wonderful hairstyles for kinky hair. I love the intermingling of skin tones in relationships. This has become so normal to me that when there’s too many white people I notice, and not in a good way.

Here’s a sticky point to consider too: if I can’t see the difference in tones because the overall filming filter makes everyone look similar, this is a bad thing.

The main cast of characters is fairly diverse, but the background extras are not. Are they trying to convey the idea that mostly white people survived this plague? That would be insane. If I strain my brain I can recall some extras being on the lighter side of dark tones, but why should I have to strain to remember that? And if my mind is remembering the sea of whiteness, why? Because I’ve set my brain to glance at the background to ensure there’s a nicely diverse crowd, that’s why.

4. The religious aspect is troublesome. Yes, I’m aware that the book was written with religion in mind. The whole story is good vs evil shown by God vs Devil using humanity. I get that. But the Christianity irked me. I’m not religious, but I do know there are more religions out there besides Christianity. None are represented, that I could see. Instead, these characters dream of Randall or Abigail and go to where they feel the greatest pull. Good people go to Abigail, bad people to Randall. And yes, this was fairly well represented by having selfish people go to Randall and those who want a community go to Abigail.

But this is also a problem. No matter how good or bad you are (or think you are), you can change. You can decide to be different. This show pigeonholes people in a way that rankled me, with the one exception of a main character, Harold. He didn’t dream of either person, and was neither good nor bad. He just hadn’t found ‘his people’. I could identify with this facet of his personality because I know my behaviour is weird for some and not normal enough for others. It’s been difficult, trying to fit in to workplaces and friend groups, and is a measure of my neurodiversity and mental illness.

So here’s Harold, trying to be good, but has had a lifetime of not fitting in and not being included. He’s tried and failed. His behaviour is shown as someone who ‘just doesn’t get it’, and people around him tolerate him more than enjoy his company. He tries to be bad, mostly because he’s angry at the world, but he’s also good at heart. When the plague hits, he travels with Nadine to Boulder and joins the body removal crew. He even makes a friend. This tentative, tenuous friendship is torpedoed when Nadine kills the guy.

Harold is neutral, but he discovered the world can be decent. Rather than resolve this and show that there’s a place for everyone, Harold is killed. This bothered me a lot because there are people out there who just need a friend, they need someone who understands them and wants to be around them. Everyone wants that, and some people are gifted with the natural ability to make friends, but some really aren’t. For them, they spend most of their time knowing they’re disliked but not knowing how to fix the problem, or if it can be fixed. Killing this character off felt like a cop-out.

Back to religion. Imagine that you’ve been dreaming of a kind woman named Abigail, so you go to her only to discover that your religion isn’t represented in the imagery, symbolism, or icons. Instead, it’s another religion, equally good, but not yours.

Oh my, also, Las Vegas has no religious imagery that I can recall off the top of my head. There’s no indication of religion other than people nailed to crosses as you enter the city. Does this mean that if you’re religious you’re good and if you’re not you’re bad? In 2021?

This entire debate could have been avoided by not using religion as a base. Yes, it’s faithful to the book to include this aspect, but like I’ve mentioned, it’s 2021 now. Rather than good vs bad = God vs Devil, why not have: people who want to try to live peacefully vs people who want to take over and rule the world? This would be effective when done well.

To conclude, overall the show is not bad. It resembles the book and previous television mini-series quite well. The storyline is a bit current, what with a plague and all, but a lot of it feels so dated that I cringed away from my screen while watching.

If you’ve made it this far, thanks for reading my rant.

#The Stand #Stephen King #its problematic

Next time Bitcoin has a big crash, I might buy some. I'm not proud of it.

#bitcoin sucks #its problematic #but it tends to go up again after a crash

Hey are we gonna talk about how ACOTAR is listed under YA on Amazon when it's very, very much not YA? Those books are not only erotica, they're graphic from what I've heard. YA is aimed at around 14-21 year olds most of the time. That's not okay. I've already seen people discuss all the other problematic shit about those shitty books, but I've yet to see people talk about this. There should not be any fucking 15 year olds reading this shist.

#acotar #acotar hate #sarah j maas #its problematic #problematic books #your fave is problematic #problematic authors

I feel like the closest I will ever be to experience what being a Catholic millenial is like is by being a huge Disney fan.

#disney #catholocism #the vatican #its problematic #still a fan