This is adorable, Silva and toddler Illumi have an assassin style talk about how precious babies are.
rest in fucking pieces
It still amazes me that I talk to guys who still think they get harassed just as much as women online. Like even from people who aren’t clearly and totally gross dumbasses. It kinda makes me think that, even in the best cases, it might be hard to really understand the sheer difference in frequency. You see a woman get harassed on a game and you go “Oh well I’ve been harassed” without understanding that there is seldom a session for her where that doesn’t happen or understanding what her inbox might look like…
That is a sort of stunning degree of difference.
"The data’s in! Women were lying about online harassment!”
"Aha! We knew it!"
“Yeah, they’ve been severely underreporting how bad things are for them, turns out.”
I’m sure it’s only fiction.
i’ve seen more posts of people being excited for Home than this movie, which made me upset because this movie comes out before Home does (not that i am saying that you shouldn’t praise Home as well). and as for Big Hero 6 (a movie that also comes out after the Book of Life) and the people saying that there is a lack of representation of Asians in media, i feel you. why? because there is a bigger lack of hispanics, and i agree Disney messed up, you be upset. but be happy for Hispanics as well because we finally got an animated movie representing us and our culture. so please go see this movie when it comes out.
that is all i ask.
im soexcited about this movie but i keep seeing this post and want to add that everyone should also keep in mind that dia de los muertos is specifically MEXICAN. la muerte (santa muerte) and a lot of what is being depicted is seen primarily in MEXICAN culture and should not be lumped together in its entirety as a “hispanic” thing.
I need to explain a little bit more about the cast, because seriously this is so cool:
The cast of characters in the movie is almost entirely Mexican, save for a few minor characters who (from what I can tell) aren’t relevant to the plot. The voice cast is ALL POC with like 3 exceptions, and most of the cast members are Mexican, meaning that this is a story being told by characters and by people who have a direct cultural connection to it. That’s huge.
Female figurine from the Hohle Fels cave near Stuttgart, about 35,000 years old. Interpreted as a pornographic pin-up.
“The Earliest Pornography” says Science Now, describing the 35,000 year old ivory figurine that’s been dug up in a cave near Stuttgart. The tiny statuette is of a female with exaggerated breasts and vulva. According to Paul Mellars, one of the archaeologist twits who commented on the find for Nature, this makes the figurine “pornographic.” Nature is even titling its article, “Prehistoric Pin Up.” It’s the Venus of Willendorf double standard all over again. Ancient figures of naked pregnant women are interpreted by smirking male archaeologists as pornography, while equally sexualized images of men are assumed to depict gods or shamans. Or even hunters or warriors. Funny, huh?
Consider: phallic images from the Paleolithic are at least 28,000 years old. Neolithic cultures all over the world seemed to have a thing for sculptures with enormous erect phalluses. Ancient civilizations were awash in images of male genitalia, from the Indian lingam to the Egyptian benben to the Greek herm. The Romans even painted phalluses on their doors and wore phallic charms around their necks.
But nobody ever interprets this ancient phallic imagery as pornography. Instead, it’s understood to indicate reverence for male sexual potency. No one, for example, has ever suggested that the Lascaux cave dude was a pin-up; he’s assumed to be a shaman. The ithyphallic figurines from the Neolithic — and there are many — are interpreted as gods. And everyone knows that the phalluses of ancient India and Egypt and Greece and Rome represented awesome divine powers of fertility and protection. Yet an ancient figurine of a nude woman — a life-giving woman, with her vulva ready to bring forth a new human being, and her milk-filled breasts ready to nourish that being — is interpreted as pornography. Just something for a man to whack off to. It’s not as if there’s no other context in which to interpret the figure. After all, the European Paleolithic is chock full of pregnant-looking female statuettes that are quite similar to this one. By the time we get to the Neolithic, the naked pregnant female is enthroned with lions at her feet, and it’s clear that people are worshipping some kind of female god.
Yet in the Science Now article, the archaeologist who found the figurine is talking about pornographic pin-ups: “I showed it to a male colleague, and his response was, ‘Nothing’s changed in 40,000 years.’” That sentence needs to be bronzed and hung up on a plaque somewhere, because you couldn’t ask for a better demonstration of the classic fallacy of reading the present into the past. The archaeologist assumes the artist who created the figurine was male; why? He assumes the motive was lust; why? Because that’s all he knows. To his mind, the image of a naked woman with big breasts and exposed vulva can only mean one thing: porn! Porn made by men, for men! And so he assumes, without questioning his assumptions, that the image must have meant the same thing 35,000 years ago. No other mental categories for “naked woman” are available to him. His mind is a closed box. This has been the central flaw of anthropology for as long there’s been anthropology. And even before: the English invaders of North America thought the Iroquois chiefs had concubines who accompanied them everywhere, because they had no other mental categories to account for well-dressed, important-looking women sitting in a council house. It’s the same fallacy that bedevils archaeologists who dig up male skeletons with fancy beads and conclude that the society was male dominant (because powerful people wear jewelry!), and at another site dig up female skeletons with fancy beads and conclude that this society, too, was male dominant (because women have to dress up as sex objects and trophy wives!). Male dominance is all they can imagine. And so no matter what they dig up, they interpret it to fit their mental model. It’s the fallacy that also drives evolutionary psychology, the central premise of which is that human beings in the African Pleistocene had exactly the same values, beliefs, prejudices, power struggles, goals, and needs as the middle-class white professors and students in a graduate psychology lab in modern-day Santa Barbara, California. And that these same factors are universal and unchanged and true for all time.
That’s not science; it’s circular, self-serving propaganda. This little figurine from Hohle Fels, for example, is going to be used as “proof” that pornography is ancient and natural. I guarantee it. Having been interpreted by pornsick male archaeologists as pornography because that’s all they know, the statuette will now be trotted out by every ev psycho and male supremacist on the planet as “proof” that pornography is eternal, that male dominance is how it’s supposed to be, and that feminists are crazy so shut the fuck up. Look for it in Steven Pinker’s next book. ***
P.S. My own completely speculative guess on the figurine is that it might be connected to childbirth rituals. Notice the engraved marks and slashes; that’s a motif that continues for thousands of years on these little female figurines. No one knows what they mean, but they meant something. They’re not just random cut marks. Someone put a great deal of work into this sculpture. Given that childbirth was incredibly risky for Paleolithic women, they must have prayed their hearts out for help and protection in that time. I can imagine an elder female shaman or artist carving this potent little figure, and propping it up somewhere as a focus for those prayers.
On the other hand, it is possible that it has nothing to do with childbearing or sexual behavior at all. The breasts and vulva may simply indicate who the figure is: the female god. Think of how Christ is always depicted with a beard, which is a male sexual characteristic, even though Christ isn’t about male sexuality. The beard is just a marker. Or, given the figurine’s exaggerated breasts, it may have something to do with sustenance: milk, food, nourishment.
The notion that some dude carved this thing to whack off to — when he was surrounded by women who probably weren’t wearing much in the way of clothes anyway — is laughable.
Good lord I am so glad I took ancient art from a female professor.
Warning for Trans Youth in Southern Ontario
Avoid Dr. Kenneth Zucker of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) in Toronto. He will not help you in any way and upon asking many invasive, disrespectful, and irrelevant questions, he will suggest you undergo “reparative therapy” to “fix” you (pictured above). When he finishes writing his “report”, which can take months, he will refer to you in an extremely dehumanizing manner that makes you out to be some kind of oddity (eg “He seems very interested in having breasts.”) and he will not respect your gender or use the correct pronouns whatsoever. Not only that, but when he requests your report cards and school pictures (???) he will really take his time in giving them back when you ask him to. Good luck contacting him outside of an appointment, too, as he very rarely, if ever, responds to emails or phone calls. He has stated he considers trans women a “bad outcome of gay men.” Don’t waste your time with this transphobic piece of shit.
Yes yes yes I’m so happy people are talking about this. That clinic works under the old DSM criteria. If you are looking for physical health or mental health or family support around gender please contact Rainbow Health Ontario or the new trans clinic at Sick Kids.
A lot of parents especially go to that clinic with their kids because it’s affiliated with such a well know national agency and they assume it will be the best support. If you hear anyone talking about it please correct them, it is very harmful. :(
I wrote a post last year about an amazing Ontario doctor who specializes in health-care for trans youth, Dr. Carys Massarella. She is the lead Physician of the Transcare Program at Quest Community Health Centre in St. Catharine’s, and is currently one of only three ‘non-pathologizing’ trans-care health providers in Ontario. ‘Non-Pathologizing’ means that when a trans-patient comes in to speak with her about care and care options, their trans identity is:
- not questioned
- not treated as something needing to be fixed
- not pathologized as a mental illness which requires a psychiatric evaluation before proceeding with care options.
If you’re a trans youth looking for health-care (or know any trans youth whose families are hoping to get medical support for them), please DO NOT go to/recommend Dr. Zucker at CAMH. He is severely transphobic and is only looking to ‘fix’ trans kids who he thinks are ‘confused’. Instead, two hospitals that are doing good work for transfolks in the GTA and surrounding area are St. Mike’s in Toronto and St. Joseph’s in Hamilton. Both are (surprisingly) Catholic hospitals, but have made reputations for themselves as providing ethical care for the LGBTQ community. Carys herself is a member of the St. Joseph’s health staff, and says that her transition was embraced at the hospital and its catholic staff, including its nuns. As well, Dr. Massarella’s practice, Quest Community Heath Centre, is a fantastic resource if you can get out to St. Catherine’s.