September 20, 2014
Wrong Wrong Wrong

sophiealexan:

hellowritersblock:

Apparently that “journalist” is a known fuck up. See this article from Columbia University’s Grad School of Journalism.

"Gawker used Nexis to conduct a corrections-per-article study of Times columnists. It discovered Stanley was, at the time [2005], the paper’s most error-prone columnist." - Craig Silverman

ETA: I thought this would make me feel better…but it’s actually making things worse. How is she still writing for that paper?

She’s been known to be so since then also. Other reviewers have no respect for her.

How in heaven’s name does she still have a job…unless of course  her scribblings a reflection of the opinions held by the higher-ups?

September 20, 2014

spicy-vagina-tacos:

white americans: ummmmmm slavery was so long ago don’t you think we should put it behind us?????? lmao (:
white americans: 9/11!!!!!!!!!!!! PEarL HARBOR!!!!!1!!!!!!! nEVER FORGET!!!!!!!?!

(via theweakinherittheworld)

September 20, 2014
"The framing of the piece, even aside from the question of Stanley’s understanding of “Scandal,” is extremely troubling. Viola Davis is described as “sexual and even sexy, in a slightly menacing way” the sentence before Stanley describes her as “darker-skinned and less classically beautiful” than Kerry Washington, of “Scandal.” Is the point here to pit two women of color against one another in a totally gratuitous beauty contest, to signal-boost white standards of “classical” beauty, or to indicate the degree to which dark-skinned women’s sexuality is menacing? I can’t keep track!"

 Times TV critic Alessandra Stanley gets things very wrong when it comes to race on TV — Salon

http://www.salon.com/2014/09/19/alessandra_stanleys_shameful_treatment_of_race_on_tv/

(via robinsworld)

So…do people know that Viola made the exact same comparison a couple of days ago in the NYT? Like, the above is still trash and unnecessary, but Viola said it herself…

(via nikkisshadetree)

Yes she said it about herself. But Viola has always been candid about her struggles with her identity as a dark skinned woman and believing that she was indeed beautiful. It’s one thing for an person to self disclose their insecurities but when another person, especially one who has not experienced this struggle themselves says it in this way they is not critical, parsed, or nuanced, it is said to accept the societal norm (myth and fallacy) of beauty instead of challenging that standard (which is based on racism and colorism).

(via raytwin)

I’m perturbed that you  have to explain this to a black woman. SMH

Its nikkkishadeplant, you have to break it down for people like her.

(via jamaicamibornandgrow)

you mean nikkishadyweed. Evil to the core she is, trying to justify some racist shit in an attempt to stick up to Shonda. Whose the mammy now? Sheeish!

(via jamaicamibornandgrow)

September 20, 2014
Wrong Wrong Wrong

hellowritersblock:

Apparently that “journalist” is a known fuck up. See this article from Columbia University’s Grad School of Journalism.

"Gawker used Nexis to conduct a corrections-per-article study of Times columnists. It discovered Stanley was, at the time [2005], the paper’s most error-prone columnist." - Craig Silverman

ETA: I thought this would make me feel better…but it’s actually making things worse. How is she still writing for that paper?

(via acceber74)

September 20, 2014
putitonmydash:

Lupita Nyong’o

putitonmydash:

Lupita Nyong’o

(via acceber74)

September 20, 2014
"The framing of the piece, even aside from the question of Stanley’s understanding of “Scandal,” is extremely troubling. Viola Davis is described as “sexual and even sexy, in a slightly menacing way” the sentence before Stanley describes her as “darker-skinned and less classically beautiful” than Kerry Washington, of “Scandal.” Is the point here to pit two women of color against one another in a totally gratuitous beauty contest, to signal-boost white standards of “classical” beauty, or to indicate the degree to which dark-skinned women’s sexuality is menacing? I can’t keep track!"

 Times TV critic Alessandra Stanley gets things very wrong when it comes to race on TV — Salon

http://www.salon.com/2014/09/19/alessandra_stanleys_shameful_treatment_of_race_on_tv/

(via robinsworld)

So…do people know that Viola made the exact same comparison a couple of days ago in the NYT? Like, the above is still trash and unnecessary, but Viola said it herself…

(via nikkisshadetree)

Yes she said it about herself. But Viola has always been candid about her struggles with her identity as a dark skinned woman and believing that she was indeed beautiful. It’s one thing for an person to self disclose their insecurities but when another person, especially one who has not experienced this struggle themselves says it in this way they is not critical, parsed, or nuanced, it is said to accept the societal norm (myth and fallacy) of beauty instead of challenging that standard (which is based on racism and colorism).

(via raytwin)

I’m perturbed that you  have to explain this to a black woman. SMH

(via raytwin)

September 20, 2014

lulz-time:

I actually can’t cope with this

(Source: lepipehd, via hellokatetan)

September 20, 2014
"

Children should remain silent, and they are ‘good’ when they’re quiet, but ‘bad’ when they are not, because they are disturbing the adults and causing trouble. This attitude runs through the way people interact with children on every level, and yet, they seem surprised when it turns out that children have been struggling with serious medical problems, or they’ve been assaulted or abused.

The most common response is ‘well why didn’t the child say something?’ or ‘why didn’t the child talk to an adult?’ Adults constantly assure themselves that children know to go to a grownup when they are in trouble, and they even repeat that sentiment to children; you can always come to us, adults tell children, when you need help. Find a trusted adult, a teacher or a doctor or a police officer or a firefighter, and tell that adult what’s going on, and you’ll be helped, and everything will be all right.

The thing is that children do that, and the adults don’t listen. Every time a child tells an adult about something and nothing happens, that child learns that adults are liars, and that they don’t provide the promised help. Children hold up their end of the deal by reporting, sometimes at great personal risk, and they get no concrete action in return. Sometimes, the very adult people tell a child to ‘trust’ is the least reliable person; the teacher is friends with the priest who is molesting a student, the firefighter plays pool with the father who is beating a child, they don’t want to cause a scene.

Or children are accused of lying for attention because they accused the wrong person. They’re told they must be mistaken about what happened, unclear on the specifics, because there’s no way what they’re saying could be true, so and so isn’t that kind of person. A mother would never do that. He’s a respected member of the community! In their haste to close their ears to the child’s voice, adults make sure the child’s experience is utterly denied and debunked. Couldn’t be, can’t be, won’t be. The child knows not to say such things in the future, because no one is listening, because people will actively tell the child to be quiet.

Children are also told that they aren’t experiencing what they’re actually experiencing, or they’re being fussy about nothing. A child reports a pain in her leg after gym class, and she’s told to quit whining. Four months later, everyone is shocked when her metastatic bone cancer becomes unavoidably apparent. Had someone listened to her in the first place when she reported the original bone pain and said it felt different that usual, she would have been evaluated sooner. A child tells a teacher he has trouble seeing the blackboard, and the teacher dismisses it, so the child is never referred for glasses; the child struggles with math until high school, when someone finally acknowledges there’s a problem.

This attitude, that children shouldn’t be believed, puts the burden of proof on children, rather than assuming that there might be something to their statements. Some people seem to think that actually listening to children would result in a generation of hopelessly spoiled brats who know they can say anything for attention, but would that actually be the case? That assumption is rooted in the idea that children are not trustworthy, and cannot be respected. I’m having trouble understanding why adults should be viewed as inherently trustworthy and respectable, especially in light of the way we treat children.

"

Children Talk But No One Listens – this ain’t livin’ (via unsungtale)

(via rozhanitsa)

September 20, 2014
Some of these chicks on here are so far up

say-it-aint-so81:

say-it-aint-so81:

Alias’s ass, I’m convinced they let her call Shonda all types of niggers and mammy’s in private chats. But yeah you keep thinking Shondas the sell out while ole girl has you consigning and capping her white supremacy. ‘This is a publicity stunt’….whet??? Shut da fuq up!!!…

Hate Ryan Murphy for the way he has repeatedly treated his minority character…hmmm you would think..but nope according to some, that dude is brillant (dude is the biggest offender of non continuity, shitting on minority characters as a whole). So are all the other hundreds of white showrunners that have come before him. Their leader adores JJ Abrahams. Its hilarious because they constsntly accuse Shonda of shit that JJ has trademarked. He’s built his whole career sterotyping and sterocasting. I mean i guess shes exactly like their fav, but shes a black women so how dare she…..Only shonda messes up tv in their world. She’s so evil in their minds that they will literally cosign KKK type bullshit to demean her. Instead of being offended yesterday as most black women were they spent their time discussing which celebrity didnt tweet in support so they must agree with the article. And after it looked like they were wrong as hell and all those people were mad, including their Unicorn (but don’t be alarmed no one was angry at Tony for tweeting, that was reserved and is always reserved for Kerry), then all sudden it’s a publicity stunt. Nah son you’re just an asshole. Sorry. Those people aren’t about any cause or any righteousness. All those social justice post and fight the power post that most of them blog and re blog are just echo chambers going with what’s popular at the time. Yesterday they would have made Don Lemon proud with all the ‘well, if only she didn’t act like an angry black woman, if Olivia was better written, these racist would love her and all black women…lmao..ok.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^alla this.

September 20, 2014

Anonymous said: there's these recent interviews to nicole beharie and the way she talked about tom mison seem kind of---- dismissive? like in that interview at comic con where asked about the reception to her alone as opposed to alongside tom mison she goes "i didn't expect to get this much cheer all by myself, I expected it to get it only when I'm with my male counterpart (tom mison/ichabod) and i dunno it seemed kind of cold-- thoughts?

acceber74:

capleesi:

I think she’s speaking more to the fact that poc women are hardly ever leads in tv shows, let alone a genre show, let alone a SUPER successful genre show like Sleepy Hollow. Outside of the romance aspect, Nicole never expected Abbie Mills to be someone crowds gravitated towards I guess, owing to the trend that PoC women in tv shows are sides, or in the case of being a lead, not lead for very long (I think Kerry Washington in Scandal is certainly pathbreaking for African American women proving conclusively they can carry a show and saying fuck you to Hollywood’s racist shit bag attitude) It seems Nicole had prepared herself to be sidelined by Mison’s Ichabod, and while Mison and Ichabod surely gets a LOT of love, so does Nicole and Abbie. She underestimated how much people would relate to her, JUST her as a character- someone who’s strong in her convictions, caring and someone who’s not perfect but has human complexities and flaws. People love them separately, their characters separately and their characters together. She probably assumed she’d just be liked as the love interest and nothing more. It must mean a lot to Nicole to be proven wrong in this case.

Heck tbh, did you know almost all critics said Sleepy Hollow wouldn’t be successful before it aired? They said it was fun but would would probably be cancelled (LOL FOX ;A;)

To not only be widely successful, but also  popular critically and publicly, it’s a lot for anyone on that show, especially Nicole I bet.

I don’t understand why anon would view what Nicole said as “dismissive”. It’s the same thing fed to many actresses in the entertainment industry about their viability as leads in their own right, more so if the actress is a WOC. Would it be viewed as “dismissive” when Scarlett Johansson makes similar comments about her yet-to-be-greenlit Black Widow movie? White actresses are always talking about the sexism in the industry, and it IS sexism if you’re being told that the only way your endeavors will succeed is if a man is involved, then why would Nicole’s comments be taken as her “dismissing” Tom and not as a stark example of the sexism she has to deal with?

Liked posts on Tumblr: More liked posts »