beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
I get cranky about stuff lately and it's pissing me off. Which obviously leads to a crankiness spiral. Which is unhelpful.

It's things where I can see systemic inequality and oppression in real life in the present day here and now, but everyone around me seems to be attributing things to individual causes and coincidence, or implying that it's not really bad because over there in the distant past or far off places, that's the real bad things.

So a novel that turns out to be about sci fi slavery kind of pisses me off because you don't need to literally reprogram and meat puppet people when you can keep them scrabbling for scraps while heavily in debt and trying to live on zero hour contracts somewhere the minimum wage isn't enough to get by on.

And novels about oppressed monotheists in a polytheist society would only not piss me off it they had kinda muslim trappings, but no, it's always secretly oppressed xtians.

And yesterday I got in a pub discussion about systemic inequalities in education and (though I didn't fully articulate this) how capitalism and economic pressures leads to the convergence of media companies into monopolies which control every level of production and distribution, all adding together to mislead voters even before you factor in how money is deliberately going back into the political process to systematically campaign on false premises. I stopped because we were there to talk about science fiction, but I started because someone made a joke about stupid Americans and then wouldn't let it drop. Apparent stupidity and ignorance has a whole lot to do with systems. You can't just call an individual stupid and make out like it's their individual problem with an individual solution. All the solutions cost money, resources, and time, and systems collude to make sure most people don't have those.

Access to information is a hugely political topic. People not knowing stuff is not just about the choices of that individual person.

Nothing is just about the choices of that individual person! People exist within systems and their actions contribute to those systems, whether they consciously will it or not!

And yeah, I go to media texts looking for things to be annoyed at. Eleven years of further and higher education have kind of got me in the habit. Because once you open your eyes to it, sexism, racism, and all the other ugly isms are sodding everywhere.

Someone yesterday was arguing the 'it's just the best person for that role' angle about Dead Bro Walking trope. Yeah all the black guys die but it's just because individually they were the best actor for the role of screaming dying person. How can anyone actually believe that and not see how it adds up?

Also, I feel it is derailing and irrelevant to start picking apart my pub level accuracy on quoting media creators, when I was trying to list dead lesbians in TV shows. The problem here isn't precisely what is said about dead lesbians, it is that all the fictional lesbians are in fact dead. I feel it reasonable to be annoyed about that. And again they argued the 'best character for the role' angle, that just coincidentally the TV show went and brought in these characters to kill them off and it has nothing to do with them being lesbians. Even if that's now 100% of the lesbians dead, that's just luck.

And I'm not arguing that content creators sit there all *evil laugh* and pick a minority to kill off this week. That's what's always being defended against, as if that's an invisible accusation, and it's entirely irrelevant. What they thought they were doing isn't the point. The point is there's a whole lot of dead bros and dead lesbians, and that is a problem. They're a bunch of individual choices of best for that five minutes that somehow coincidentally adds up to meaning black guys and lesbians are all killed off. Which is creepy and bad.

Also, if the problem is dead lesbians, pointing out how many strong women there are on a show is also irrelevant. Unless they're dating each other, they are not the current point.

And I am so wound up and frustrated about this stuff.

And it feels like it's all of a piece, like people are trained into thinking things one at a time, attributing things to individual one off choices, and not looking at the systems and aggregates and big picture.

And I know that sitting there telling them elsewise four at a time is very nearly no help at all but
I'm
just
so
cranky.



I can see so many problems, I know there's more problems I don't see, and I can't see how to get other people to see it let alone solve it.



And this is without getting into the sort of real world problems with a real world body count. Those are just horrifying and terrifying and leave me somewhere between really angry and awful hollow.


Especially the science based stuff. It's really quite a large problem when science can spend my whole adult life pointing at something and saying with some authority 'unless we do the thing we are going to die' and yet we don't do the thing. Humans are actually killing the whole planet. We could well render it uninhabitable. We're causing a mass extinction event and the Earth, as a whole, may not survive it. This is a problem.

And my individual choices for doing anything about said problem are... limited.



I mean I'm sitting here somewhere all western educated industrialised rich developed, with all those years of degree behind me, in a position of in some respects massive privilege, in one of the countries eating the world. But I don't see how to stop just by changing my individual consumer choices. They're not enough of the problem to make much of the solution. I don't know how to get at the levers. So I'm benefiting from systems of power and oppression, but feel pretty powerless to stop them or get out of the train, so to speak.

... this is why I daydream about space colonies. new place, new systems. also, my author brain knows that the point of the story will turn out to be that even in a new place humans are still human so we'll have to deal with our shit or live with it longer, and the suddenly concentrated nature of society would highlight everything.




Plus of course I feel powerless to do anything because I'm disabled and have had no support for a year and a half and it is in fact bloody difficult to do anything. Including shopping. Or the house viewings that are part of the plan to get me somewhere I can cope with better.

And then I feel weird about what I am getting that other people don't, like I should be guilty about having plus stuff, except I'm kind of stuck with the bits i'm not getting, and then it's all problem and no solution.



Everything all problem no solution.

Massive collective action is only way to make changes.

Except I've seen massive actions, protests, all sorts, and it don't seem to do any good.




So then I hide under a blanket and play Sims a lot.
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
I have seen a lot of argue about IM3 on a topic that didn't even ping me, despite being relevant to my interests
spoilers go under the cut
Read more... )



this is an important topic and I want to go over this and make it make proper sense.
but it's five in the morning, so this is the best sense available right now.
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
I've only got the first 3 eps transcribed so I can't count 4 or 5. Also even when I've got an accurate list of speaking characters I won't be able to count 5. I'm not watching that again.

But I'm going to count people in the first 3 days. I go through the transcript, copy all the names of speaking people, label them best as I can see (currently from memory), and then add people up. I can't count the children, they are Many and Varied.
Read more... )


So it works out at about 41-44% women and 15% people of color for these three episodes.
Which is... actually vaguely embarassing since I vaguely felt there were A Lot Of Women, and we're still not up to half.
But for the show is doing better.

Very roughly. Still need to check.
Need the names and categories for people in day 4 and 5.

This is a first draft and I shouldn't draw conclusions from it.


I haven't figured out Bechdel pass/fail yet. Two named women, yes. Who talk to each other, yes, but is it about a man or in a group including men? Have to check. Think y and y.

That requires brain and reading or watching tho. And I've done a bunch of that for right now.

also I should be asleep by now.
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
More Torchwood numbers.
If I stick to just counting speaking parts then I can count how many speaking characters get dead, how many are women, and how many are people of color. I can also count black men, because there's a specific issue there. But must remember 'dead black men' is a subset of 'dead people of color'. Do I need a column for 'dead white men' or is that just the remainder? ...I need a column.
I can only count what I see, and may be inaccurate.
This being Torchwood many of these characters are either dead before they're speaking or die more than once. Read more... )

I did attempt to count corpses as well, but there's some crowd scene issues going on. I could freeze frame and have a go, but massive job much?

Right. Table under the cut. It may not be a very useful table, but I've made it now so I'll post it.

Read more... )

And now for season 2:
Read more... )
There's also longevity tests to play with: Who makes it through two minutes, who gets two seasons, who's still going? Maybe I do that later.


Okay, I have *tried* to make tables but I keep on thinking of more ways up to put the data. Is it one black man dead out of one black men ever, or one out of many? I need another column or something. Wait, I'll write it as fractions, so 0/1 means one black guy survived and 1/1 means there was one black man and he died.

There were 11 black men with words to say in the two seasons. Two died.
There were 13 black women with speaking parts, some of them in several episodes. Two died. Plus the woman in the recording was already dead.

So there's a pretty good chance of survival in Torchwood even for black people.
Win.

Under this next cut goes a list of all the dead speaking characters.

Read more... )



I also made a little list of queer relationships in answer to someone elses post so I'll paste them in here because I have the window open.
Read more... )


If there is any more counting to do someone else can do it. I have head of fuzzy and forgot both breakfast and lunch. *facepalm*
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
http://characterscount.pbwiki.com/Torchwood#view=page
http://characterscount.pbworks.com/Torchwood-S1%2C-S2
Yes, someone made a wiki so if the theoretical crowds of fans all help count then we can put all the numbers in the same place.
Still working on formatting, standardising and accessibility.
It was pointed out my pretty color codes aren't helpful for people that don't see pretty colors.
Also, some of them are too pale for me to read, now I think about it. :eyeroll:
So I made it a bit different.
I will make it different again once I think of a better way to phrase it.

I also added a column for the test the person counting SG1 does where it's the race equivalent of Bechdel, two people of color talking about something other than a white person. I've filled in a few, but where there's more than two characters involved I might have to watch again to check. And I'm not watching again for a while. But it being a wiki other people can fill in the boxes if they happen to know.
... okay, actually, I could figure it out from my notes and have spent the morning doing so.

I keep feeling like the thing where two people of color seldom get to talk is less of a Thing than the one where two women don't get to talk to each other, because there's a half the country of women and less than half of people of color here. But I also am the first to say it doesn't matter if women aren't much in the military or whatever because they're making up stories and they can make stories better. Also while a random sample might be 10% any given person of color will have ancestors of color too, just for starters, so their lives aren't random and should have more people in. So I think it's my feeling I need to change.

details on people of color below the cut
Read more... )
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
Have finished counting characters in Torchwood season one and two.
Those links go to my longer notes.

I did more tables later and more notes about race here.
And some about deaths.

I am counting speaking characters: male or female, white or of color, and Bechdel test pass/fail.
My count is likely imperfect. I can only count what I see.

According to the 2001 census Cardiff is 92% white.
I'm going to assume that men and women are 50/50. (I'll assume it because I *looked* for a number but did not find one. Google fail.)

I shall do math and draw conclusions, in pretty color coded tables.

First a recap on season one, now in one table:
Read more... )

Green means there's at least the percentage found in Cardiff, orange means it's close (I chose 40% for women, roughly meaning one more woman needed to be even), and red means they've got some explaining to do.
On the Bechdel green is pass, an orange fail means two women talked about men, a red fail means no scene had only two women talking. Thankfully there's always at least two named women, they just don't always get to chat alone.

And now for season 2:
Read more... )

So, general conclusions:
There's a consistently high percentage of people of color, helped along by the way that Tosh on her own is a representative proportion for anything up to 10 speaking characters, so with a maximum cast of 28 and most shows in the mid-teens then one or two other people of color keep the percentages quite high.
Season One averaged 17% people of color.
Season Two averaged 18% people of color.
Consistent, and consistently more than double the 8% wiki reckons for Cardiff and the UK.
I am not complaining, I'm counting. I think it's cool.
I had a thought, and looked up the USA: around 80% white. [ETA: Though different bits of wiki have different answers, and 80% white is the *highest* number; try here ] So Torchwood is actually reflecting [or closer to] the ethnic diversity of the USA. And Torchwood does quite well shown in the USA.
Interesting.

There's a very frequently low percentage of women. Over the entire two seasons only 4 episodes had 50 something percent women. No episode had more than 60% women, and 6 had only 20 something percent, with the lowest at 21%. The inequalities are not symmetrical, you never get a lot of women and very few men to the same extent you get a lot of men and very few women.
Season One averaged 37% women per episode.
Season Two averaged 39% women per episode.
An improvement, technically, and yet not a very large one.
2/5, or 40%, of the main cast are women... so at least they're consistent.
Which is odd.
Did we suddenly get outnumbered and me not notice?

Bechdel Fail and Pass are about 50/50 over the two seasons, but season one was 8/5 in favour and season two was 5/8 to the fail. Episodes with quite a high percentage of women can still Bechdeil fail.

I did not count have now counted the hypothetical 'reverse Bechdel' where two men talk about something other than a woman. In the interests of technical accuracy I probably should. Since I'm not rewatching them all again right away I'll do it from the transcripts. And, also, do it later.
... later apparently meaning after 0330.
I have made blue 'pass' to mean two men talk about something other than a woman. I have made pink where there is no scene with no women in it. Read more... )
So, now I've checked, there's a difference between the two seasons. The first season has four episodes where every scene has at least one woman, and one that barely just barely has men alone; the first and last episodes are both all mixed, and it's about even on test fail between genders. The second season has two all mixed episodes, not the first and last; the fail is 2 m-m to 8 f-f. There's more times women are involved in interactions in the first season.

I've said before I liked the first season better for politics reasons, but this wasn't consciously what I had in mind.

Next, because clearly I need to do more math, I can take the full transcripts and the notes I've just made on categories of all those speaking characters, and I can figure out how many words they had each in each episode.
... this may take a while...
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
I am counting speaking characters: male or female, white or of color, and did they get dead (although the Dead count got complicated when I started counting corpses that never spoke first). Also Bechdel pass/fail.
My count is likely imperfect. I can only count what I see.

2-01 Kiss Kiss Bang Bang
Read more... )

2-02 Sleeper
Read more... )

2-03 To The Last Man
Read more... )

2-04 Meat
Read more... )

2-05 Adam
Read more... )

2-06 Reset
Read more... )

2-07 Dead Man Walking
Read more... )

2-08 Day in the Death
Read more... )

2-09 Something Borrowed
Read more... )

2-10 Out Of The Rain
Read more... )

2-11 Adrift
Read more... )

2-12 Fragments
Read more... )

2-13 Exit Wounds
Read more... )

And we're done for the first two seasons.


Season 2 had way more Bechdel fail than season 1.
I am aware that if I count two women talking in a team scene then there's more pass, but with the team around they're not precisely talking to each other. If there's no scenes where women talk to each other without men around then there's a weird effect where women only exist when observed by men, and I wanted to count that. The times it fails because they're talking about a bloke make it 'observed by or observing'. The times it passes tend to be very, very brief. Which adds up to irritating.

And, also, explains why it's difficult to get femslash subtext going. I mean, if women never get scenes together, we have to do all the work in the fic with no handy tensions, sexual or otherwise. And, looking at the percentages of female characters, we have quite a lot less to work with than the boyslash does.

*sigh*
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
Have finished counting characters in Torchwood season one. ETA: Went on and finished both, please read completed tables instead /ETA.
I shall do math and draw conclusions. Would be easier if I could remember how to make a table... aha, auto generator to the rescue...
Read more... )

So that's the numbers in a table with color coding.
Pretty. But revealing some problems. More with the gender than race though.

After exam, which I will clearly pass due to all my concentrating and studying and stuff, I will go and count season 2. I wonder if it's better.

ETA: Went on and finished both, please read completed tables instead /ETA.
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
Yesterday I looked up % of white people in Cardiff for TV watching purposes. About 9/10 white would be accurately reflecting the city.

Today I look up the UK and White British plus White Other is once again around 91% in 2001.

So if you're at a UK convention, out of every 100 fans, 9 of them would be people of color if they're the same mix as the UK population. If there's 1000 people at a convention, that's 90 people of color.

I strongly suspect we're a long way short of that at many conventions.

I haven't the first clue how to improve that, but it would seem of the good.

Flip side, figuring out the numbers involves keeping track of people just like the census and all those government documents do, and that never seems very friendly. I'd worry about a convention that asked when you signed up. It would even seem rude to run an LJ poll asking. But not asking ends up with no useful numbers.

Hopefully someone has done more thinking than me about this one, because my thinking is *useless*.
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
I am counting characters that get to speak but with no weighting for number of lines or screen time or being series regulars. (Those would also be valuable, but require more math.) Are speaking characters: male or female, white or of color, and did they get dead (although the Dead count got complicated when I started counting corpses that never spoke first). Also Bechdel pass/fail.
My count is likely imperfect. I can only count what I see.

Wiki reckons Cardiff is "Ethnicity 91.57% White, 1.99% Mixed, 3.96% S. Asian, 1.28% Black, 1.20% Chinese or other."
http://www.icar.org.uk/4733/statistics/about-cardiff.html
seems to be Wiki's source and that's the 2001 census figures they're quoting.
So 9/10 white would accurately reflect the ethnic variety of the area.

I'm going to assume men and women are about 50/50 in real life without looking it up.

1-01 Everything Changes
Read more... )

1-02 Day One
Read more... )

1-03 Ghost Machine
Read more... )

1-04 Cyberwoman
Read more... )

1-05 Small Worlds
Read more... )

1-06 Countrycide
Read more... )

1-07 Greeks bearing gifts
Read more... )

1-08 The Keep Killing Suzie
Read more... )

1-09 Random Shoes
Read more... )

1-10 Out of Time
Read more... )

1-11 Combat
Read more... )

1-12 Captain Jack Harkness
Read more... )

1-13 End of Days
Read more... )

That's the first season done, I'll do another post for second season.

Feel free to join in with later episodes.


Note on Bechdel test: I'm only counting it when the scene is about women, not when they're part of a mixed male and female group. This is because I want to see if women only exist when men are around. Bechdel failing movies do that a lot. Women exist solely in relation to men. When we're not observed by or observing men, we're schrodingered into voiceless invisibility. It's weird and creepy. So: if there's men around when two women talk, if they're part of the same group, it doesn't count. Other tests may vary.

Counting

Mar. 7th, 2009 02:50 pm
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
There are some theories about texts that boil down to numbers, like "there's not many x people in y genre" or "all x people get killed in y media" or "very few x talk to other x on TV".

The Bechdel test isn't a pure number test, but it involves counting to two (named women) and then ticking a box (talk to each other) and another box (not about men). So you could make a form where you could fill in Name 1, Name 2, ticky ticky, Bechdel Pass.

So today I feel like sitting down and rewatching some TV, but I also feel like continuing the meta debates that net fandom is so good at. So I decided I would count.

Now I need to decide what to count.

Characters
female
male
white
of color
sexual orientation
not-disabled
disabled

... and none of those categories are actually tick boxes when you get into details, nor are they binaries. Plus I've noted me not noticing little things like a character/person not being white. So my numbers might not be very good.

There was a OFCOM report on disability in the media in 2005. "Estimates of the proportion of people with disabilities in the UK population range between 14 and 19%. In 2004, 12% of sampled programmes (on BBC1, BBC2, ITV, Channel 4 and Five) included representations of people with disabilities. However less than 1 person/character in 100 in the sampled programmes overall had a disability."

There's probably reports for other areas but I don't have them on my laptop and don't see them on the list with the disability report. Poking the internet isn't how I want to spend my afternoon.

I just did a quick look around at some definitions and have realised I'm going to be really bad at really a lot of categories. That's embarrassing.

I shall try anyway.

So does anyone have any suggestions? What am I not seeing? What needs seen?
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
I am a science fiction geek, and I am a cultural studies student, and when these things get together this usually involves words like 'discourses' and being very academic about science fiction. But sometimes it involves being very SF about culture. So, I have a theory:

isms suck, like gravity
therefore orbital mechanics is a good way to conceptualise the interaction of texts and isms

For the purpose of this theory an 'ism' is a big accumulation of ideas.
The ones that tend to bring things to grief are racism, sexism, ablism, classism, and heterosexism.
And probably some other things that don't end with ism, because language isn't convenient like that. But.

There are some signifiers that accumulate other ideas around them in complicated structures. Read more... )
Isms might look like these small compact things far away, but they suck so hard they probably pull everything you're saying around even from there. And there's lots of them, so they pull in lots of directions at once. And, because a metaphor is not physics, you can in fact crash into several of them at once.

So, I am studying up on this symbol system I find myself living in, and trying to find the sucky bits, so I can steer around them.

Going 'lalala I shall make a straight line! ...oops' is pretty much how those isms just keep on getting bigger.
beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
I've been reading some more books that I think I liked ten years ago.
... I was a very different reader then.

They're very clearly written by someone who spends waaaay too much time playing level-based RPGs. The kind where you get a castle if you go up enough levels. And it treats women and children as Dependents ie sources of plot motivation and therefore jeopardy.

What it never actually does is treat the female characters as *PCs*. They're not players, they don't do things for themselves. Sometimes they don't even get any lines. There's one woman who exists to be called dangerous a lot and then killed. She never speaks a word. She just makes plot happen by her violent death.

I've had enough of that shit from comics, you know?

Women and children are not plot motivators. They're people. Sometimes mini people. But if they keep on getting killed offscreen to get the (rich white male) player characters into action then it gets all kinds of creepy.

And having a wider ethnic mix is cool, yes, *but* if all the non-white characters are effectively NPCs, if the only reason they ever do anything is because one of the pov PCs tells them to, that winds up mega creepy too. I mean at some time the author must have thought it was a cute learning experience to have a poor colored kid have serving a rich white guy as their highest aspiration, and the tragic death is a staple of the fantasy genre, but if you stack it all together you get something that kind of turns my stomach.

Furthermore simply identifying someone by their probable ethnic background, on first sight and all subsequent identifications, and never elaborating on any aspect of their character, comes across as way creepy. I mean for a start they're writing about cities where all these ethnic groups mix together, so they can get that exotic far off lands adventuring experience, but they're identifying them all as being from and/or of or fundamentally just being the ethnic group indicated by their skin color. So, no mixed race marriages in fantasyland in their few thousand year old empire then.

Having random color provided by inventing a race that keep their women naked and in chains is also not scoring any feminist points whatsoever. It isn't even like they're the bad guys, they just wander past to have people stare at them.

Then there's the other genre staple, the 'secret son of nobility' thing. It's that whole 'blood will tell' thing hiding in there. Add it to the 'I happily die for you master!' stuff and the 'crazy ethnic mystic' stuff and the 'dark skinned women who coincidentally happen to wander around with no clothes on and want a lot of sex and yet never produce mixed race offspring for reasons the text will never bother getting into' and...

The only reason I liked these books in the first place was I was reading them with my eyes closed.


There have to be better books than these. Ones where women are fully featured player characters with motives of their very own. Ones where what happens to the babies is actually a Thing and not just a 'now we skip twenty years so we can write about more white male teenagers again' thing.

... every time I read more of this rubbish I'm rather put off going to look for them, you know?

I mean sometimes I try a new author and get something shiny, but sometimes I try a new author and find half way through the first book the strong female character I was quite liking at the start has ended up impregnated with shapeshifter babies who might kill her. By her half brother.
(I don't know how that book ended. I think I threw it away. The scary part is it seemed to be the start of a series.)


another thing: On the whole, babies don't kill you. I mean, difficult and dangerous pregnancies happen, yes, fine, but quite often the only thing that happens between 'start pregnancy' and 'baby arrives' is you get much bigger around the middle.
... er, people who've actually had babies can point and laugh now, of course.
What I mean is, demon babies? Really not the point.
Sometimes people have babies because they want to. And then they raise them because they want to. And there's no rape or incest or demonic shapeshifting lifesucking involved *at all*.


Yes, this even applies to males. Yes, even mpreg. I realise all that artistically wasting away as they prove their love via dying so the child of their union can live is... well, happening in plural of stories, so presumably worth the time to someone, but dear god is it annoying. Making more life is all about life! Where the heck did this =death bit come in???

Also, and I realise this ends up a swipe at the whole hurt/comfort genre but I'm on a roll now so I'll just be cranky in public... when I back out of this sentence and start over... ahem...

Also, I do not think that the thing where someone is dying and someone else is caring for them is in fact a good basis for a solid lifelong relationship. Granted, if the dying part actually happens then it will indeed have lasted for life, but I don't read deathfic if I can avoid it so I mean those miraculous last minute save times. The dying/caring thing - those are some pretty well defined roles there. And once they're out of those roles they're in effect in a completely different relationship. In any pairing I seek out they're back to a relationship of near-equals in a working partnership.

Having and raising babies? Plus the near-equals working-partnership thing? Could be incredibly cute.

I mean really, this is the kind of real life challenge that most people face - they've got all these skills and talents and this relationship that's rolling along pretty well with the two of them, and then there's a baby, and they're faced with a whole new challenge, being three with a whole new focus and work that maybe doesn't divide in convenient ways and all the compromises involved with that. And, oh yes, possibly defeating alien invasions or keeping the forces of darkness at bay and all that. Balancing the needs of the many against the needs of the few, or the one.

How is this not cool?

Why aren't there more stories about this?

I can understand on TV, because they'd have to hire babies and that doesn't work so very well.
But word-writers lack budget and time constraints.


But then there's the other thing, where babies exist for daft plot reasons. Like I read one where there's a time travel story a bit like Back to the Future where the kid has to go make sure her parents shag. I don't remember which set of parents those were. Given that I at least started to read it either they were two guys or I was really desperate for fic that day. But in Back to the Future the protagonist is the kid who travels and they have this whole arc... I think, I haven't watched it in an age, but a finding themself thing going on, yesno? But in this fic the character was not the protagonist and all she existed for was to get these two other characters together.

How messed up is that?
Because again: Women and children? Not merely motivation for others.


I realise making a baby or a five year old exist as a person in their own right is a tad bit difficult. But it bugs me. Not even tiny people should just be a means to an end! Especially the end of getting two parental units to get or stay together. I mean how often and how badly does that go wrong? Besides which, I've never found 'oops, pregnant, must marry!' a particularly romantic resolution.

My absolute least favourite though is when there's "oops, false alarm, no baby". Because then there's no baby. There was +1 person and now there's -1 person and just because they're fictional doesn't mean I can't get upset.

I haven't read that often though. And one time the presumed-baby had tentacles. Apparently getting rid of tentacle things is supposed to be different.

... I think I've read far too many stories where people come equipped with all kinds of parts, including tentacles, to actually feel that.

... this is also a drawback with the demonic pregnancy thing. Because if demons are people too, then it's just sad either way.




/rant
or more like slightly incoherent trailing off of rant.
I should probably sleep soon.

Profile

beccaelizabeth: my Watcher tattoo in blue, plus Be in red Buffy style font (Default)
beccaelizabeth

June 2017

S M T W T F S
     1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 2021 22 23 24
25 26 27282930 

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 27th, 2017 07:02 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios