21 8 / 2014

Kids Reenact Emmy-Nominated TV Shows (Game of Thrones)[x].

(Source: wolfstrk, via nobodysuspectsthebutterfly)

18 8 / 2014

petyrbaelishs:

A Song of Ice & Fire Fancasting

     ↳Lotte Verbeek as older!Sansa Stark

(via househardyng)

05 8 / 2014

alayne-stone-heart:

I saw someone on winteriscoming say that we have moved from Martin’s story to D&D’s story and that’s it’s not necessarily a bad thing, just different. And I feel like ranting.

The thing is, I do know what they mean. If the show changes a character’s motivations it’s not necessarily bad. It just means that we have two different stories and one isn’t automatically superior. BUT, the story in the books is simply more inclusive. In the books, the Martells are people of colour. We have amazing layered female characters who break traditional fantasy tropes, instead of fulfilling these sexist tropes like in the show. Catelyn is the best example here, I think. In the books, Loras Tyrell is more than every gay stereotype put together. Oberyn is more than his sexuality. The weird offensive ableist beetle story doesn’t exist in the books. In the books, Cersei isn’t raped by the only person she trusts. Brienne calls Jaime a coward, but never “a bloody woman”. Arya never calls most girls idiots. In the books feminine female characters are valued just as much as the female characters who fill traditionally masculine roles.

While flawed and by no means perfect, the books are for everyone. The show is written through the male gaze and mostly for white cishet men. I personally resent D&D taking the books that are empowering to me as a female fantasy fan and turning them into the same tired stereotypical sexist fantasy. And the thing about changing characters’ motivations is that too often on GoT they are changed to the detriment of female characters in a way that takes away their agency. See Sansa plotting her escape with Dontos versus Sansa being dragged away by Dontos like a sack of potatoes. When a change like this is made then I can say it has made the story worse.

TL;DR - D&D’s story isn’t inferior because it differs from the books. D&D’s story is inferior because it’s sexist, racist and gross.

(via nobodysuspectsthebutterfly)

05 8 / 2014

cosplayingwhileblack:

Character: Loki
Series: Thor
Cosplayer: Panterona Cosplay (Trinidad)
Photographer: Guru Kast
SUBMISSION

cosplayingwhileblack:

Character: Loki

Series: Thor

Cosplayer: Panterona Cosplay (Trinidad)

Photographer: Guru Kast

SUBMISSION

(via disneyforprincesses)

31 7 / 2014

29 7 / 2014

If any potential Ariannes want to come and sit on the street you can email me at aimee@rejectedprincesses.com. —Aimee Richardson (@Aimee_P_R)

(Source: sansalayned, via fatpinkcast)

26 7 / 2014

Anonymous said: Everyone's talking about Arianne being cut from the series, why is this a big deal?

apriki:

Because if it is true, what they’ve done is taken a major POV chapter female character from the books and erased her and given her role to a male FOR LITERALLY NO REASON. WHAT IS THE REASON? WHY ARE THEY DOING THIS? HOW DOES IT BENEFIT THE SHOW AND THE STORY TO TAKE AWAY ARIANNE’S STORY AND GIVE IT TO A DUDE? THERE IS NO REASON THERE’S NOT ONE REASON

and like if that wasn’t bad enough, so much of the point of bringing in Dorne and the Dornish characters is to show how differently they view and treat women within the medieval hell that is Westeros. It’s the only kingdom that doesn’t practice primogeniture and has a history of female rulers (for example, Doran and Oberyn’s mother, not their father, ruled in Dorne. BUT WHEN THEY THREW A THROWAWAY REFERENCE TO DORNE’S PREVIOUS RULER IN THE SHOW, THEY CHANGED IT TO A MAN LIKE LMAO WOW D&D DID WOULD IT REALLY FUCKING KILL YOU TO MENTION A RULING PRINCESS DON’T LET THE DOOR HIT YOUR BASIC ASS ON THE WAY OUT). The whole fucking kingdom was founded by a woman. It serves as a way to show that the misogyny is Westeros is not the norm, but a choice and that it’s not like that everywhere. It’s easy for the reader to be like ‘okay, this is a medieval-based world, of course women aren’t going to rule’, but Dorne just existing the way it does throws that completely out of the window and it’s REALLY IMPORTANT. 

And like a concept so central to the asoiaf series is shining a light on how misogynistic the fantasy genre itself often is, how female characters are underdeveloped or token ‘sorceress’ villains or two-dimensional love interests. It shows through example how authors have the choice to write dynamic roles for women in a fantasy setting but just choose not to and blame it on the standard within their world? like YOU WROTE THIS WORLD. YOU INVENTED IT. YOU HAVE MADE UP THE CUSTOMS AND TRADITIONS OF THIS WORLD AND WILLINGLY CHOSEN TO NOT INCLUDE WOMEN IN THAT OR SHOW HOW THEY CAN STILL HAVE STORYLINES AND CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT IN A SETTING THAT SUFFOCATES THEM

And like by choosing FOR NO REASON (!!!!!!!!!!!!) to TAKE AWAY a female character like Arianne - who is sexual, who owns her sexuality, who uses it as a weapon, who was raised to rule, who is confident in her power, who is in cahoots with her girl gang cousins (who are all powerful in their own ways, who all identify their femininity differently and use it as a tool differently) to STAGE A COUP AND PUT A FEMALE ON A THRONE OF THE ENTIRE SEVEN KINGDOMS BY USING THE VERY LAWS OF DORNE THAT GIVE HER POWER is honestly just so fucking offensive. And stupid. And throwing one of the key tenets of the series back in its face probably because they’ve seen how ”’badass”’ people think Oberyn was and want another ”’badass”’ Dornish character just like him and of course that can’t be a woman!! No woman cool here!! Tough boy make show better!! Go jump off a cliff.

25 7 / 2014

melonylotseven:

the irony of erasing arianne with trystane is literally oustanding

like. there’s an impressive amount of ridiculousness in that choice.

'you will not rob my of my birthright, you little shit' - arianne martell, like every chapter

(via fauxkaren)

25 7 / 2014

aegontargaryen:

ASOIAF fancasting:
↳ Alexander Siddig as Doran Martell

(via househardyng)

22 7 / 2014

Screw writing “strong” women. Write interesting women. Write well-rounded women. Write complicated women. Write a woman who kicks ass, write a woman who cowers in a corner. Write a woman who’s desperate for a husband. Write a woman who doesn’t need a man. Write women who cry, women who rant, women who are shy, women who don’t take no shit, women who need validation and women who don’t care what anybody thinks. THEY ARE ALL OKAY, and all those things could exist in THE SAME WOMAN. Women shouldn’t be valued because we are strong, or kick-ass, but because we are people. So don’t focus on writing characters who are stong. Write characters who are people. [x]

(Source: sanastark, via househardyng)