lizbee | (Reply)

From:

I haven't come across the term 'hopepunk' before, but it seems to be another one of those terms that applies to basically whatever the user of the term wants it to.

I haven't read the Expanse books, but the tv series is pretty dark, and certainly not without its flaws. The first season in particular is pretty dude-centric and the treatment of Julie Mao gives me the creeps. Season 3 has probably the best treatment of women so far, but even then the female characters tend to only interact with one other female character at a time (and the show really, REALLY Needs More Gay. Anna is great, but she may not even be in Season 4, Drummer's sexuality is implied but so far unconfirmed).

And modern fandom -- okay, Tumblr -- has this bad habit of describing works as more pure ("pure") than they actually are.

GOD, YES. I think it comes for everyone and everything to be Morally Pure: I, a non-problematic individual, will only ever consume non-problematic content, therefore everything I like will be non-problematic. Mad Max: Fury Road is a good example, as is Captain America: Winter Soldier (a movie I am so fucking sick of). What happened to liking something while also acknowledging its flaws?

Also, I read your linked article on why novels like The Goblin Emperor didn't work for you, and I completely agree with what you say here: that horrible phrase “awesome ladies”: they turn up, do or say something to subvert the patriarchy, and then step back and let the men get on with the plot stuff

I feel like that sums up so much of what fandom ultimately seems to want from female characters, especially female characters of colour. Turn up, say or do something cool, be emotionally supportive to the male lead, get nothing in return because she's a Strong Independent Woman Who Who Don't Need No Emotional Support, then go away again. Emotional and moral complexity and a variety of relationships, healthy or unhealthy? That's for white men.