What Do You Mean I Cant Be Superman?

lady_avengers__assemble__by_kathrynlillie-d52idse The year was 1991 and it was time for Halloween. I was all dressed up in my Superman costume...an anxious happy budding little fangirl at the age of 5 without a care in the world. I was walking with my mom in my elementary school when a teacher approached me and asked who I was supposed to be. I proudly held my head up high and stuck out my little chest as I declared, "I'm SUPERMAN!" The woman frowned at me and said, "Oh honey, you're a girl. You can't be Superman. You're Supergirl!" I instantly got visibly upset and confused. Enter the heroine of our little story: MY MOM. "Excuse me, but don't you ever tell my daughter who she can or can't be. She is not limited by her gender. If she says she's Superman then that's who the hell she is. My daughter can be whomever and whatever she chooses to be." (My mom is awesome.) Once again, my head was held up high and my little chest poked out. I'm Superman bitch...

I tell this amazing story because in the year 2013 I find it amazing that even now we are still trying to put a limit on young girls and women by telling them, "No. You can't do this because you're a GIRL!" We tell them "You must like pink because it's for girls, you can't play with action figures, you don't like sports and you can't possibly read comic books or like anything geek related." It amazes me that when I mention to some men that I enjoy a lot, if not almost everything that they like, they look at me like I'm an anomaly or with skepticism. IT'S A LIE! GIRLS DON'T LIKE THESE KINDS OF THINGS!!!!!!! Well you'd be surprised buddy. I know a very large number of (single, beautiful) women who are bigger geeks and sports fans than the men that I know.


As mentioned by this week's TheNerdpocalypse Podcast, "No Penis, No Batman" (great episode by the way), Paul Dini claims that executives don't want girls watching their shows because apparently girls don't buy the toys. I just don't get the stupidity and laziness of this statement. Instead of trying to figure out what they can do to get more girls buying the toys or possibly making a product geared towards 51% of the population, executives choose to just shrug their shoulders and say, "Welp we're just going to IGNORE this demographic because we assume that they won't buy our product since they obviously can't like it due to their lack of a penis." Seriously? Do you not realize that the people who shop the most are of the female persuasion? Isn't that one of the stereotypes that comes with being a woman? That we like to shop?


Shes a smart cookie...

This way of thinking is why we so rarely see a strong female lead in a superhero and/or action movie. These executives think that a movie with a strong female lead will not do well and no one will go see it. I mean they're correct right? Nobody wants to see a woman with a good head on her shoulders, quick witted and kicking ass right? Who wants to see that!? Oh look Hunger Games Catching Fire made over $700 MILLION Worldwide so far. And oh look! The main character is a strong, quick witted, ass kicking young lady! Oh and would ya look at that, according to recent reports there's an increase in young women doing archery because they were inspired by who? Katniss Everdeen the female lead of the Hunger Games! *gasp* Yeah, you executives need to get your head out of your asses and realize that the female gender makes up a large portion of your consumers, we kick ass and we want to see other women who kick ass on the big screen! Give Wonder Woman (the Queen of Badassness) a fair chance by casting a woman that pretty much embodies what it means to be an Amazon, not just another pretty face. Give many of the other popular and well liked female superheroes a shot by putting them into movies or giving them shows. Most importantly, give the little girls of the world a chance by giving them someone to look up to and aspire to be. Stop telling them that they can't do things because they lack a penis. You're missing out on a lot of money by ignoring them and plus its plain ole rude. I'm just saying...

Gratuitously Angry - Star Trek into Darkness Exploits Women?

demotivational-poster-3616 You know I'm seriously considering a segment called The Rabbles because there seems there's never a shortage of Nerd Outrage. There's always something that gets the Nerds in a tizzy. And you know as a blogger, I'm here for it! Give me fuel to blog about! Lol but as a Nerd/Geek/Dork/FanGirl/what have you and as an observer, I'm just like...why? Certain things I kind of understand the outrage but there are other things when I sit there like wait, what's the problem here? So yeah...I might consider having "The Rabbles". Sounds like a soap opera...*insert telenovela theme music here* 27239541

So this week in The Rabbles, the nerds are outraged over the "gratuitous underwear" scene in the new Star Trek movie. Now if you haven't seen it yet...I advise you to do so. It's a good movie in my honest opinion. But anyway. The scene that has everyone all in a flutter is this:


When I saw the movie I saw no problem with this particular scene. However, apparently people found it unnecessary, didn't feel that it had any purpose other than showing a half naked woman, it was objectifying Alice Eve's character etc etc blah blah blah. I'm sorry but what? There is a purpose in showing this scene. First of all, Eve's character was changing into a space suit. Secondly, it was in MY opinion to establish some type of hint towards sexual tension between Carol (Eve's character) and Kirk. This was hinted upon again (IN MY OPINION) towards the end when he welcomes her as a member of the crew and she gives him this...look which seemed like a look of interest. Now as for this matter of objectifying Alice Eve's character and just showing her body I say um. So? Well not really so but...what action movie doesn't have some sex/half naked actor/actress in it? I saw no outrage when Black Widow changed in the back seat of the car in Iron Man 2. I saw no outrage when Thor was shirtless in Thor. "Gratuitous" half naked scenes are part of the formula. It is used to draw in audiences. So I really don't get the outrage that I have been seeing. Also don't get why it's okay for men to be half naked but not women. Are men just their man titties? Is it okay to ogle and objectify Chris Hemsworth (which I do every chance I get). Also why must it be objectifying? Why can't we just be enjoying the beauty that is the naked body? I hate to say this but don't pick and choose what you rabble rabble about. If you're going to be outraged about something let it be for EVERY instance that it happens. Not just that ONE particular time. But that's just my opinion. Everyone is entitled to one.

The writer of Star Trek: Into The Darkness was nice enough to apologize for this on The Twitter:


But I seriously saw no need for him to apologize. On the other hand, of course I know WHY he apologized. He can't have people not going to see his movie because of this incident. So kudos to him apologizing for that. If anything, some of the Trekkies I know feels it should be apologizing for what he did to one of their favorite shows. I'm no Trekkie so I don't know whether  or not things were changed in the movie. I'm sure there was, as is the way of Hollywood. But like I said, I enjoyed the film. As did others. If you want more than MY humble opinion you can always mosey on over to here. To you angry Nerds? Get the stick out of your booties. Learn to enjoy things instead of nitpicking (says the woman who picked apart The Dark Knight Rises. BUT IT DESERVED IT!) I swear you'll live longer!  Now...lets OBJECTIFY SOME MAN TITTIES!