So I watched this music video, and this is in fact completely untrue. There are many scenes in which black/brown girls are casted.
One could conceivably argue that any white star who features twerking in a music video is automatically being exploitative.
However, that was not my perception of this video in particular. It actually appeared to me the director took pains to portray a variety of dance styles (ballet, interpretive dance, rhythmic gymnastics, break dancing, twerking, cheerleading, etc.) all as equally valid art forms. Every performing group in the video includes a variety of ethnicities. I think I did actually see a black/brown dancer in the ballet troupe, though it’s difficult to tell. Look in the rear left of this gif:
We don’t know if they cast individual dancers or hired a dance troupe, so if black women are underrepresented that might say more about the dance troupe’s selection practices than the video director’s casting practices.
All the styles of dance, ballet or otherwise are presented in the same fashion — talented professionals being brilliant + Taylor Swift being endearingly incompetent. The black women in the video aren’t portrayed as Taylor’s dancing accessories, but rather as experts in their style:
Moreover, at the end of the video there’s a sequence showing all the different professionals being silly and dancing in a non-choreographed manner, thereby humanizing them, showing they exist outside of their role as dancers in Taylor’s video:
I think if we interpret the twerking scenes in this video as demeaning, that says more about our cultural perception of black women than it does about this particular video’s specific portrayal of black women.
Is this a place we can put all the special snowflakes?
|—||Anonymous (via palmist)|
Jeeze, was my post really that unclear?
listener-blue, you understood what I was saying, right? :/
Well yes, I did. I knew you were saying that - using the given example - ‘intelligence’ is too vague a descriptor anyway and can mean different things to different people.
I also appreciate that adhoption was not necessarily trying to say men are ‘smarter’ than women or even have a discussion on that - it was just a random example used to illustrate the point that people often misunderstand ‘on average’ or take it too personally depending whether their demographic is deemed above or below average in a given area.
Honestly, I am not sure how it turned into an argument, as it seems to have done. We all enter these sorts of discussions with our own perspective, and our own area of interest. While adhoption was obviously wanting to talk about the general misunderstanding of the phrase ‘on average’ you seemed to want to take the example and kinda roll with it since that is an area that is of interest to you. I don’t in any way think you were either trying to derail the post, or turn it into a war of the sexes, however it has seemingly come across like that :\
Just had to unfollow someone because their bio actually said “I’m an anti-femimist.”
If you’re an anti-feminist:
- quit your job
- put on a skirt to your ankles
- clean the house and cook for someone
- give up your license
- forget about voting this year
- let every man that wants to put his hands on you do it
As an “anti-feminist” you just gave up every right that women have fought to get, so you might as well just get on a train back to the 1920’s. We’re better off without you.
Would you be okay with a guy telling a girl that’s breaking up with him that she needs to go back to her psychotic ex, because as his “new ex” he gives up the right to his protection from someone who previously stalked and threatened to rape/murder her even retroactively? ”Oh, you don’t need me? Then go get assaulted and probably killed by that other guy you used to date!”
Because that’s how you’re acting now except in regards to a socio-political movement instead of a relationship, and it’s still disgusting.
OP has this tagged with #you’re actually mentally deficient.
I’m not sure, however, why they think that being anti-feminist means you have to ‘give up’ your rights. I do wonder if OP actually took the time to engage with the person they unfollowed, to ask them the reasoning behind their anti-feminist stance. They will more than likely find that this person is very much pro equality, and very much appreciates the rights women have today thanks to feminism, but have other issues with feminism that stop them from supporting it.
It might be, for example, that they don’t like the fact that feminism has basically shat on men since it started. It might be that they don’t like the victim status that feminism often tries to force upon women. It might be that they don’t like what modern feminism has become, though they can still appreciate the good feminism has done for women along the way.
But no, no OP - just carry on making wild assumptions about peoples opinions without actually bothering to open up a discussion on the topic. Continue to shit on other women simply for having a different opinion than you. That sure is what feminism is all about, right?
It’s a mixed thing, I can’t speak on behalf of all other Natives but the ones I’ve met and grew up around couldn’t care less. Like I said you can buy them at Pow wows. The way I view it is as long as you’re honoring it and not mocking us it’s fine. Now certain ones made for certain people is off limits because that shit is difficult to earn, every feather is earned and is a sign of a noble deed. Just don’t sweat it and if you have any questions about Native culture or just anything pertaining to Native feel free to ask
I am so excited to learn this new interesting perspective because I have always been in absolute awe of how beautiful war bonnets are, and I’ve always had a sad spot in my heart knowing I could never have one, because I’m not a disrespectful little asshole who shits on other people’s cultures and achievements.
And now, I have learned that I wouldn’t be considered a disrespectful little asshole by all Native Americans by owning one of those glorious bonnets and my heart is happy :) not saying I’m going to run out and buy one tomorrow, but this is really cool to know.
To a certain degree I will relate tartans to this. It used to be that you could/should only wear a tartan if you were of that clan. Now, however, people are more relaxed about it, partly because the clan system is basically long gone in any meaningful manner. However it would be frowned upon to wear certain military tartans if you do not belong to that regiment, as you have not earned the right to do so.
people really struggle to understand what “on average” means. if you tell a group of people than men are on average smarter than women, the men will go all smug and start rubbing it in to the women that they are smarter. no. one of the two groups was always going to perform better than the other, on average, because it is almost impossibly unlikely that they will be exactly identical. it means next to nothing.
nothing has changed in the room when you told them the statistic. the men and women who are smart are still smart. those who aren’t still aren’t. there will still be a large number of women in the room who are smarter than a large number of the men. those men have no cause to brag to those women. they have no reason to feel superior, because they are still morons. nothing has changed. it’s just a meaningless number, which was always going to go one way or the other.
And it also depends on how one is defining intelligence…
That’s true. But this applies to so many things. For example, in my previous job I would often say that women (on average) are better at multitasking than men. This doesn’t mean all women are good at multitasking any more than it means all men are poor at it - yet that is often how people took it.
I have links to prove it bruh.
To clarify - I wasn’t questioning that you were telling the truth. I just find it pretty ridiculous that anyone thinks like that :)
Well originally the very first thing that happened was I think she was talking about pedophiles and she said that an 18 year old who has sex with a 17 year old is a pedophile.
Lots of other stuff happened after that.
People don’t actually think that do they? People don’t actually think that 18yr olds having sex with 17yr olds are paedophiles, do they?
I loved this episode. I loved Ozai and Azula’s portrayals especially lmao
oh and Toph
A ‘Ring of Fire’ solar eclipse is a rare phenomenon that occurs when the moon’s orbit is at its apogee: the part of its orbit farthest away from the Earth. Because the moon is so far away, it seems smaller than normal to the human eye. The result is that the moon doesn’t entirely block out our view of the sun, but leaves an “annulus,” or ring of sunlight glowing around it. Hence the term “annular” eclipse rather than a “total” eclipse.