Female pilots edited out of the Star Wars movies.
I saw the tweets about this today, and I was like oh yeah, I remember hearing about that.
And then I saw the pictures and just— wow. What it would have meant to have these women in the movie, all this time. I can’t properly articulate it but it’s hitting me unexpectedly hard.
Wow thats a shame, even a nice old lady too. These Space Valkyries should have been left in.
They really should have.
I lived, ate, and breathed Star Wars from age 2 until 2005 when RotS finally beat the enthusiasm out of me, and I have NEVER, EVER in all my reading on behind-the-scenes and makings-of heard of these shots. It’s a shame there was no relaunched edit of the original trilogy they could have slipped these in OH FUCKING WAIT THERE’S BEEN LIKE 3 OF THOSE NOW.
Fuck. FUCK. Whoever decided to edit out and bury these needs to french kiss an angle grinder.
Just a reminder - here are the things that made it when Lucas recut all the movies in 1997: a CGI Jabba, a whole new Wampa, and a brand new slave girl musical number. He also edited the films slightly with each major home video release, replacing Sebastian Shaw’s ghost with Hayden Christiansen and making the Ewoks blink.
Unless there are extenuating circumstances I’m unaware of, this shit could get added back in so easily. Disney is going to rerelease these at some point - why not with these characters?
And people have the nerve to ask why women get into relationships with abusive men
This is why, people. This is why. Stop being complicit in it.
and that is what is so fucking scary we are told to like it… (via freshmouthgoddess)
Licia Ronzulli, member of the European Parliament, has been taking her daughter Vittoria to the Parliament sessions for two years now.
I’m sorry but women get shit done. In fact, not sorry.
One day that little girl will either kill us or rule us.
The first time I saw this a while back, I just thought “huh, cool.” But it really just hit me what immersion like this can really do during those developmental years. This little girl will have Parliamentary procedure in her bones. That’s crazy. And still very cool.
Hey, look what happens when people don’t make a big deal out if stuff like this. Guess what? A big deal does not get made. There would be a shitstorm if someone tried to do this in America. The mother in question would also be expected to either quit her job or find daycare.
One of my best friends took the time to warn her employer that she was pregnant and get them to agree to a set up that would be beneficial to both her and the company. After the baby came and it came time to make good, the company pulled out and said it was because it wasn’t fair to other people. She was gradually forced out of her job and my friend went from managing a successful store to having to endure a debate over whether they were going to pay her the top wage for a cashier.
I say this from experience and I have way more instances to back this up: The grocery store that rhymes with Raider Moe’s is a misogynist boys’ club that literally hates women.
my friend’s tree is literally the greatest thing i’ve ever seen.
I wish I had this tree so bad.
|—||The American Bar Association Journal (via thisisthinprivilege)|
NEW YORK — A New York attorney on Thursday said the life of a murdered transgender woman wasn’t worth the same punishment as if his client had killed someone “in the higher end of the community.”
Piece of scum attorney.My blood is fucking boiling.
The attorney and whomever that scum is defending are the worthless ones
All right, listen up, Tumblr. This is one of the few times I’ll actually give a social commentary, so here we go. When you’re a lawyer, your job is to fight for your client. No questions asked. You make whatever argument you can. You verbally rip apart people on the stand when they side against you. You say whatever you need to. Do I think this murderer is a piece of scum? Yes. Do I think his lawyer is probably a piece of scum too? Yes. But this has to be said. When you’re a lawyer, sometimes you’re forced to do dirty work. Because at the end of the day, if people stop fighting for the guilty ones, sooner or later, there’s no one to fight for the innocent ones either. You got a problem with that? Don’t be a lawyer. Problem solved. Does what this lawyer said suck? Yes. But it wasn’t your friend or family member that got murdered and it’s not years of your freedom on the line, so kindly fuck off. This lawyer’s job is probably hard enough as it is.
You’re fucking awful. Kindly fuck off
He said she was less than human.
What does that have to do with his job at all.
How does that make the murderer any less guilty?
I am a lawyer. (Disclaimer: I am not your lawyer. Consult a lawyer in your own state for anything that affects your rights.)
What this scumbag said does not fall under the ambit of zealous representation.
Arguments made to a court have to have a basis in law or a reasonable argument for reversing existing law and/or making new law. (I’m paraphrasing.)
There is no basis in law to argue that the murder laws do not or should not apply to transgender women or sex workers because of what kind of people they are or because their lives are somehow less valuable. None. Zero. Nada.
If I were that judge, I’d have reported the attorney for a Rule 11* violation for even making that argument, and be looking into my state’s rules of professional conduct to see what else he might have violated by doing so. In my state, even without a provision specifically protecting people on the basis of gender identity, I would be comfortable making the argument that this lawyer’s conduct was prejudicial to the administration of justice as a knowing manifestation of bias or prejudice based on sex. See TNRPC 8.4(d) and Comment 3 thereto.
Attorneys get enough shit for legitimate zealous representation issues without muddying the water as if every argument an attorney makes is ok because of zealous representation. It is not. This is not ok.
Also, if the commenter who posted that is a lawyer, they need to take a few more PR CLEs, because zealous representation does not and has never meant “you say whatever you need to.” Doing so violates Rule 11, shows a lack of candor toward the tribunal, and contributes to the degradation of the profession.
Does zealous representation mean we sometimes have to do things that seem unfair - hell, that are unfair? Yep. I can’t give a specific example because of my own professional limitations, but even in the short time I have been practicing law I have had to make arguments based on existing law that I know is unfair.
Does zealous representation extend to making an argument that a human being wasn’t really a person worthy of protection of the laws against violence because of who they were or what job they did? No, I can’t think of a set of facts where that would be true even in a PR hypothetical for students, much less real life. To make a Rule 11-compliant argument, the lawyer would need a cogent and reasoned analysis as to why the Fourteenth Amendment doesn’t apply to this victim such that they should be exempted from the protection of the laws against murder. “Because bigotry” is not such an argument. Again, I can’t think of any argument that would pass Rule 11 to get around equal protection of the laws against murder because of the status of the victim.
This is not just a “oh, popelizbet is a dang hippie lawyer” argument, either. Prominent law bloggers with many more years of service than I, whose politics barely brush mine, are condemning this. This kind of hateful garbage brings disrepute on our profession because it is morally wrong to make these kinds of arguments. Scummy lawyers get away with enough fuckery without people excusing things they do that are inexcusable based on their complete misunderstanding of what zealous representation actually is.
*Some states may not designate the rule with this rule number, but in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 11 is, in part, the rule against making arguments to the court that are not supported in law or do not advance a colorable argument to change existing law. A similar Rule exists in the Rules of Criminal Procedure. To my knowledge, every state has adopted this portion of the Federal Rules.
"My body, my choice" only makes sense when someone else’s life isn’t at stake.
Fun fact: If my younger sister was in a car accident and desperately needed a blood transfusion to live, and I was the only person on Earth who could donate blood to save her, and even though donating blood is a relatively easy, safe, and quick procedure no one can force me to give blood. Yes, even to save the life of a fully grown person, it would be ILLEGAL to FORCE me to donate blood if I didn’t want to.
See, we have this concept called “bodily autonomy.” It’s this….cultural notion that a person’s control over their own body is above all important and must not be infringed upon.
Like, we can’t even take LIFE SAVING organs from CORPSES unless the person whose corpse it is gave consent before their death. Even corpses get bodily autonomy.
To tell people that they MUST sacrifice their bodily autonomy for 9 months against their will in an incredibly expensive, invasive, difficult process to save what YOU view as another human life (a debatable claim in the early stages of pregnancy when the VAST majority of abortions are performed) is desperately unethical. You can’t even ask people to sacrifice bodily autonomy to give up organs they aren’t using anymore after they have died.
You’re asking people who can become pregnant to accept less bodily autonomy than we grant to dead bodies.
I beg to differ. Jaime Alexander has had a lot of visibility over the past few years and has received nothing but kudos for her role as Sif. That’s one of the reason when it was rumored she might be getting the role it was news everywhere.
I would say she is a far surer bet.
Kerry is a great actress. I’m not sure why you don’t see her a believable in an action movie. She has some superhero movie cred too. Good actresses can be good in a wide range of movies. Not sure where you’re coming from there.
Yes it is true Kerry is not white and many people believe that Wonder Woman should be played by a white actress.
However, in this case given the caliber of the actress and the following she has it wound’t be that big an issue to reduce the box office.
Uh, WW is an Amazon princess from a fictional island. It’s weird that she’s white by default, not weird that a woc would play her.