hoorayforgifs

Random gifs -- made some, not all.

"

Okay, okay, I’m going to tell you what Hermione sees in Ron.

A trio is a balancing act, right? They’re equalizers of each other. Harry’s like the action, Hermione’s the brains, Ron’s the heart. Hermione has been assassinated in these movies, and I mean that genuinely—by giving her every single positive character trait that Ron has, they have assassinated her character in the movies. She’s been harmed by being made to be less human, because everything good Ron has, she’s been given.

So, for instance: “If you want to kill Harry, you’re going to have to kill me too”—RON, leg is broken, he’s in pain, gets up and stands in front of Harry and says this. Who gets that line in the movie? Hermione.

“Fear of a name increases the fear of the thing itself.” Hermione doesn’t say Voldemort’s name until well into the books—that’s Dumbledore’s line. When does Hermione say it in the movies? Beginning of Movie 2.

When the Devil’s Snare is curling itself around everybody, Hermione panics, and Ron is the one who keeps his head and says “Are you a witch or not?” In the movie, everybody else panics and Hermione keeps her head and does the biggest, brightest flare of sunlight spell there ever was.

So, Hermione—all her flaws were shaved away in the films. And that sounds like you’re making a kick-ass, amazing character, and what you’re doing is dehumanizing her. And it pisses me off. It really does.

In the books, they balance each other out, because where Hermione gets frazzled and maybe her rationality overtakes some of her instinct, Ron has that to back it up; Ron has a kind of emotional grounding that can keep Hermione’s hyper-rationalness in check. Sometimes Hermione’s super-logical nature grates Harry and bothers him, and isn’t the thing he needs even if it’s the right thing, like when she says “You have a saving people thing.” That is the thing that Harry needed to hear, she’s a hundred percent right, but the way she does it is wrong. That’s the classic “she’s super logical, she’s super brilliant, but she doesn’t know how to handle people emotionally,” at least Harry.

So in the books they are this balanced group, and in the movies, in the movies—hell, not even Harry is good enough for Hermione in the movies. No one’s good enough for Hermione in the movies—God isn’t good enough for Hermione in the movies! Hermione is everybody’s everything in the movies.

Harry’s idea to jump on the dragon in the books, who gets it in the movies? Hermione, who hates to fly. Hermione, who overcomes her withering fear of flying to take over Harry’s big idea to get out of the—like, why does Hermione get all these moments?

[John: Because we need to market the movie to girls.]

I think girls like the books, period. And like the Hermione in the books, and like the Hermione in the books just fine before Hollywood made her idealized and perfect. And if they would have trusted that, they would have been just fine.

Would the movies have been bad if she was as awesome as she was in the books, and as human as she was in the books? Would the movies get worse?

She IS a strong girl character. This is the thing that pisses me off. They are equating “strong” with superhuman. To me, the Hermione in the book is twelve times stronger than the completely unreachable ideal of Hermione in the movies. Give me the Hermione in the book who’s human and has flaws any single day of the week.

Here’s a classic example: When Snape in the first book yells at Hermione for being an insufferable know-it-all, do you want to know what Ron says in the book? “Well, you’re asking the questions, and she has to answer. Why ask if you don’t want to be told?” What does he say in the movie? “He’s got a point, you know.” Ron? Would never do that. Would NEVER do that, even before he liked Hermione. Ron would never do that.

"
Melissa Anelli THROWS IT DOWN about the way Ron and Hermione have been adapted in the movies on the latest episode of PotterCast. Listen here. This glorious rant starts at about 49:00. (via karakamos)

(via ginnabean)

— 3 weeks ago with 55018 notes
fandomsandfeminism:

idkwhatimdoingonherelol:

fandomsandfeminism:

equalityoverfeminism:

Protip: Don’t be this retarded. If you consent to sex in a drunken stupor and regret it and declare “rape” afterwards, the whole ordeal is your fault and your fault alone because:
You were stupid enough to consume too much alcohol.
You were stupid enough to consume too much alcohol around people you shouldn’t be trusting.
You fucking consented and the man believed he was permitted to have sex with you.
Quit victimizing yourselves (in such idiotic ways too) — you only perpetuate the “misogynist” stereotype that all feminists have a collective IQ in the two-digit range. 

I need Feminism because when a woman points out that a “yes” given when you are unable to properly consent is NOT in fact proper consent, bigots call her ableist slurs.

You’re completely correct. However, the fact is that that woman did intentionally render herself "unable to properly consent". This unequivocal fact makes it entirely justified to blame the victim in these instances.  

And you can go fuck yourself.
No. No, no no. It is never the victims fault. No one forces a rapist to take advantage of someone who is clearly too intoxicated to consent. You don’t get to give a rapist a free pass just because beer was involved. 
Fucking disgusting rape apologists. 

I think my “favorite” part is the fact that really, if a girl is MAKING HERSELF UNAVAILABLE TO ACTUALLY SAY YES, if she is intentionally rendering herself unable to properly consent, that is literally her saying no. How does that fact not register? If you fill up your day planner to where you literally cannot say yes, to a date or something… Does that mean that somehow you’re really saying yes, even though you literally cant?

What the fuck is wrong with these men?

fandomsandfeminism:

idkwhatimdoingonherelol:

fandomsandfeminism:

equalityoverfeminism:

Protip: Don’t be this retarded. If you consent to sex in a drunken stupor and regret it and declare “rape” afterwards, the whole ordeal is your fault and your fault alone because:

  1. You were stupid enough to consume too much alcohol.
  2. You were stupid enough to consume too much alcohol around people you shouldn’t be trusting.
  3. You fucking consented and the man believed he was permitted to have sex with you.

Quit victimizing yourselves (in such idiotic ways too) — you only perpetuate the “misogynist” stereotype that all feminists have a collective IQ in the two-digit range. 

I need Feminism because when a woman points out that a “yes” given when you are unable to properly consent is NOT in fact proper consent, bigots call her ableist slurs.

You’re completely correct. However, the fact is that that woman did intentionally render herself "unable to properly consent". This unequivocal fact makes it entirely justified to blame the victim in these instances.  

And you can go fuck yourself.

No. No, no no. It is never the victims fault. No one forces a rapist to take advantage of someone who is clearly too intoxicated to consent. You don’t get to give a rapist a free pass just because beer was involved. 

Fucking disgusting rape apologists. 

I think my “favorite” part is the fact that really, if a girl is MAKING HERSELF UNAVAILABLE TO ACTUALLY SAY YES, if she is intentionally rendering herself unable to properly consent, that is literally her saying no. How does that fact not register? If you fill up your day planner to where you literally cannot say yes, to a date or something… Does that mean that somehow you’re really saying yes, even though you literally cant?

What the fuck is wrong with these men?

— 3 months ago with 1119 notes
Do you think mayyybe wizards come back as imaginary friends? Did Fred fake his death?! Was he brought back?? THIS IS STILL TOO SOON FOR ME. 
I totally just made that correlation in my head at work today.

Do you think mayyybe wizards come back as imaginary friends? Did Fred fake his death?! Was he brought back?? THIS IS STILL TOO SOON FOR ME. 

I totally just made that correlation in my head at work today.

— 5 months ago with 8 notes
#dropdeadfred  #drop dead fred  #harry potter  #fred weasley  #muggles  #hogwarts  #too soon  #rip fred weasley  #movie correlations 
"I’ve been saying this for years, that gender identity and sexual orientation are different but so many people don’t know. I think that the reason for that is that we are in the LGBT community and we get lumped with gay and lesbian folks and bisexual folks, but [for us] it’s not about sexual orientation, but gender identity. I also think that a lot of the issues that folks seem to have with gays and lesbians, particularly when kids are bullied, are about gender. It’s about someone assigned male at birth not acting the way a boy should act. So much of it comes down to gender and this fear of femininity in our culture. Julia Serano talks about this so brilliantly, even in the history of feminist theory, femininity has been presented as something that’s artificial and masculinity is something that’s authentic, and even in a lot of feminist discourse until recently, femininity was seen as something that was artificial and fake. So there is this fear of feminine that we see in a lot of different aspects of culture that is punished. That’s a part of patriarchy. In a lot of ways we can’t talk about homophobia and transphobia, without talking about patriarchy."
Laverne Cox (via yomo7)

(via corseque)

— 7 months ago with 5818 notes
"These days, before we talk about misogyny, women are increasingly being asked to modify our language so we don’t hurt men’s feelings. Don’t say, “Men oppress women” – that’s sexism, as bad as any sexism women ever have to handle, possibly worse. Instead, say, “Some men oppress women.” Whatever you do, don’t generalise. That’s something men do. Not all men – just some men.

This type of semantic squabbling is a very effective way of getting women to shut up. After all, most of us grew up learning that being a good girl was all about putting other people’s feelings ahead of our own. We aren’t supposed to say what we think if there’s a chance it might upset somebody else or, worse, make them angry. So we stifle our speech with apologies, caveats and soothing sounds. We reassure our friends and loved ones that “you’re not one of those men who hate women”.

What we don’t say is: of course not all men hate women. But culture hates women, so men who grow up in a sexist culture have a tendency to do and say sexist things, often without meaning to. We aren’t judging you for who you are but that doesn’t mean we’re not asking you to change your behaviour. What you feel about women in your heart is of less immediate importance than how you treat them on a daily basis.

You can be the gentlest, sweetest man in the world yet still benefit from sexism. That’s how oppression works."
— 7 months ago with 81392 notes