Kill The Lights

25 Mar 2014

Anonymous asked: Hey, sorry to bother you but could you explain to me what a meta is? I've googled it but I haven't found anything that really explains it to me in a definite manner.

The best definition I can find online is probably here:

It’s a concept I’m not sure exactly how to describe as much as it’s something I’ve grown to inherently know what it is and isn’t? Primarily, meta in fandom terms is used for discussion about the universe in ways the creators haven’t addressed - so a fan meta for this past season of Teen Wolf (when we were told we would learn Stiles’ real name, which was a lie) might discuss the possibilities of what his name could be while looking in context at what the show had presented, and what the creators had commented about - then delved into the text some more. (In the case of Teen Wolf, unfortunately, fan meta tends to be a lot better thought-out and continuity-aware than the actual show is).

Essentially, it’s the term used for when fans are commenting or interacting with a piece of work that involves more than just a review, reaction,  or recap.

I’ll sometimes tag my commentary meta-ish or mini-meta when I’m going on a bit of a rant that’s less analysis of things and more bringing a lot of little points together to rag on what’s become a ridiculous level of shits-not-given by the powers-that-be, because I see it as less analytic and introspective than what I tend to deem ‘meta’, but more than just a general commentary.

I hope that helped somewhat!

21 Feb 2014

Teen Wolf: Kitsune/Nogitsune Mini-Meta

Before I start, a disclaimer - this is all theoretical, not spoiler-ish. Chances are I’m thinking about this way more in depth than the actual show did. Anyhow, here’s a few random ramblings and thoughts on Teen Wolf & the Kitsune/Nogitsune aspect in Season 3B

I hardly know where to begin when it comes to the kitsune mythology - there are huge amounts that appear to be drawn from, so speculation could go in a million directions, and I don’t want to simply copy and paste everything. Instead, there are a few sections I think are interesting to point out in relation to TW:

Hoshi no Tama: One tradition holds that this literally holds the soul of the kitsune - and I think it has weight in what could be the reason for the nogitsune’s grudge:

    “Confound you!” snapped the fox. “Give me back my ball!” The man ignored its pleas till finally it said tearfully, “All right, you’ve got the ball, but you don’t know how to keep it. It won’t be any good to you. For me, it’s a terrible loss. I tell you, if you don’t give it back, I’ll be your enemy forever. If you do give it back though, I’ll stick to you like a protector god.”

    Theoretically,  someone in Beacon Hills could have the Hoshi no Tama of the nogitsune - being what led it there in the first place. The kitsune are usually expected to deal with problems caused by the nogitsune, so it would follow that it wasn’t Kira’s family who took it - they’re just here to deal with the nogitsune.

One of the curious things about the folklore is how kitsune are apparently able to take on the appearance of anyone, regardless of age or gender - but they have to have something on their head to do so. Though this is different from possession, it goes side-by-side with the ‘unwrapping’ of nogitsune-Stiles head. If they’re staying true to the mythology, it could all be illusions placed upon Stiles, or the real Stiles could be missing entirely - with the only one we see actually being the fox.

It’s also interesting to note the state of ‘Kitsunetsuki' - literally being possessed by a fox. This can help to identify the difference between Kira and her mother, who appear to be Kitsune themselves, vs. Stiles, who's been possessed - the mythology has room for both.

Several other meta-theories have been proposed with Allison being the ‘true’ nogitsune, or possessed - theoretically this would follow the mythology better, as those possessed are usually female.

However, I think it’s important to note that most of the information on the mythology relates directly to Kitsune, the ‘good’ foxes, as it were. The information on Nogitsune is limited, since I don’t read Japanese. It is interesting to note that Nogitsune was "wild fox, used at one time to differ between good and bad foxes. At the time they used ‘kitsune’ to mean a good fox/messenger from Inari and nogitsune as all foxes who did mischief and tricked people. Not really considered evil, more like prankish." So here comes the question of whether Teen Wolf/Jeff Davis thought everything through (and thus the nogitsune has a bigger backstory than just bad/evil), or whether it was just haphazardly thrown together. Could go either way.

On a somewhat unrelated note, I was peering through for meanings of Kira’s name - in the somewhat controversial move of having her father take her mother’s last name (controversial because of the Korea/Japan history), she was given the last name Yukimura. While her name doesn’t appear to have specific meaning, it’s possible that she’s meant to be descended from the famed samurai Sanada Yukimura, who was known as "A Hero who may appear once in a hundred years" and "Crimson Demon of War".

A bit more on Japanese Superstitions & Mythology:
[Superstitions] [Mythology] [Superstitions] [Kitsune] [Kitsune]

10 Jul 2013

Anonymous asked: I really like your theory on the Dark Druid! Any thought on why this Dark Druid suddenly came to Beacon Hills? Or if there is any connection with the Alpha pack?

Well, Cora commented that word was spreading that a Hale was alpha again in Beacon Hills - I’m guessing that had something to do with it. The question would be if Cora really did survive, and is part of the catalyst, or if she was brought back first? That, to me, would be the main tie to the Alpha pack - either she was caught by chance, or on purpose.

My worry right now is the preview for the upcoming episode - we’ve been told there’s major character death. Ms. Blake isn’t a major character, at least not currently, but it’s possible that’s who they’re referring to or that she might also die (again, see extended preview). My fear is that they’re going to kill her off and say she had absolutely no connection - and we’re supposed to feel really sad. I think that would be a major disservice to both characters and fans, because that would be saying my first major fear was right - that they didn’t care enough to actually give character development for her/reason behind things like her being in the school records at 2am, that the only reason we’re supposed to care about her is because she’s somewhat involved with Derek. I’ve just started getting positive about possibilities again, but this preview really worried me.

9 Jul 2013

Who Is Jennifer Blake?

Disclaimer: This is not anti-Jennifer/Dennifer! I may not ship it, but you are totally welcome to ship whatever you want. She could be good, evil, or neither, but I do not want to police your right to ship. This is just a meta-bit on who she is/why we don’t know much yet.

This season my biggest problem with Jennifer Blake has been how little we know about her. It felt like the creative team didn’t care enough to give us a character they were developing and fleshing out. After last night, and some other fans’ commentary, I’ve begun to wonder about more intricate reasons we’re not being told much yet. (and hoping to god they exist or I’ll be pissed)

What We Know: Jennifer Blake is a first-year English Teacher at Beacon Hills High School. She was there on the night of the full moon, long after everyone else had left (guesstimated time about 2/3 am?). She needed to be in the records room for some reason. She sees a therapist (good, because in this godforsaken town everyone should). She finds Derek Hale very attractive (not surprising), and commented that this was not how she saw their first date going, insinuating she’d been thinking about it in some context. She also suggests that he not tell anyone he’s okay. (Also, as HelloTailor pointed out, she told him he looked like an open wound and then had sex with him while he was clearly not healed or his wounds covered up? Guessing that’s just TW logic)

Mini-Meta and Questions:    
    * Jeff Davis has commented that names are almost always chosen for a reason. Shipsanddip has done some excellent research about meanings of names for most of the characters. Here’s a direct excerpt from her Jennifer Blake research:

    Jennifer is a Cornish form of Gwenhwyfar which in turn is the proper, Celtic spelling of Guinevere. Guinevere was the Queen consort of King Arthur who infamously had an affair with the knight Sir Lancelot. In light of this, it might be prudent to refresh your memory on that particular story if you don’t remember it. Interestingly, Jennifer in its own right may mean “white fairy” or “white phantom”. So Ms. Blake could be a phantom. Joy!

Blake means black, having been derived from the Old English word “blac”. Being described as black or dark can only bode well for a character.

My conclusion is that Jeff Davis doesn’t want Derek to have nice things. And I hate him for it.

* Romeo and Juliet - Jennifer Blake is an English Teacher, and has demonstrated a knowledge of various titles. When she brings up Romeo and Juliet, I found it kind of surprising - the faked death in that story is what turns it into a tragedy, and there’s no way she didn’t know that. Then again, it could just be brought up because it’s also, for some reason (sorry, theatre person with shakespeare ~Opinions~ here) seen as the most romantic story every written. So the question I have there is whether the writers had it brought up because they thought their audience would all know it (whereas Ms. Blake should have much better comparisons), or for a more purposeful reason.

Theories: The following are some possible theories I’ve been running through in my head.

Theory A) Jennifer Blake is/is working with the “Dark Druid”. This is the one I’ve had the most thoughts on, so bear with me. Jennifer Blake’s name has connections to phantoms, fairies, and blackness, and comes from the Cornish/Old English, much like the Druids. She showed up at the school right before the sacrifices started. She went through the records room when she thought no one else was in the school - possibly to find people with the right qualifications for sacrifices? She had the opportunity to be in the school unquestioned during the hours of Harris/Music Teacher’s disappearances. She had the opportunity to put Wolfsbane in Finstock’s whistle. At the point when the werewolves were in the most danger at the motel, she tried to convince Derek to not tell anyone yet (and see: Romeo & Juliet commentary), and then kissed him and slept with him at a stage where most people seemingly would’ve waited until he healed/they knew more about each other (then again, TW logic). This theory, to me, actually puts reasons behind her actions so far/our lack of information on her, but it also could be a way for the creative team to draw attention away from someone else? (seems unlikely, but always possible, and would be way better than them just not caring enough to flesh her out).

Theory B) She’s working with the Alpha Pack. This one is one I don’t put much stock in - the only evidence I can see is circumstantial; she showed up at a similar time and was the only one we knew to know Derek was alive. Evidence against it - she was in the school the night of the full moon with no visible defense, and looked genuinely shocked when suddenly werewolves showed up (even when only the audience could see her); if she was working with them, I can’t imagine she’d be unaware and unarmed on that particular night.

Theory C) She’s got some other connection, for good or bad, that we don’t have the details to figure out yet.

Theory D) She’s genuinely some innocent bystander and the creative team doesn’t care enough to give us actual information on her, which would be seriously the worst thing that could happen.

Completely Separate Thoughtstream/ possible addendum or alternative to Theory A: We’ve been shown that Stiles is supposed to be good at noticing the culprits early, and one of his major comments was Cora Hale (who I love already, but who we also are getting next-to-no information on). We’ve got the hands reaching out at each other in the opening credits (meta from other people has given good logic to it being the Hales), and a tree that could theoretically represent a family tree, rowan wood, or both. Cora also didn’t show up at the place she’s supposed to be living the entire time Ms. Blake was there that we saw. Bringing up the “white phantom” meaning - what if the two of them are connected in a way that’s meant to bring the Hale Family back from the dead? What if that’s what the sacrifices are for? Similarly, if we go with the “fairy” meaning, what if that’s how Derek suddenly healed everything at once when she kissed him?

21 Jun 2013


Here is why the Derek and Ms Blake scene doesn’t work for me. [This is highly personal and might not appeal to everyone. And also long. As always.]

Read More

i just have a lot of feels and Nat is my favourite <3

21 Jun 2013

Sterek and Derek/Ms. Blake : my personal reaction



I’ve been trying to formulate my reaction both within the story to Derek/Ms Blake and how fandom has responded to it, and it’s all kind of messy in my head, but I’m going to put it out there because maybe other people are feeling the same.  What I’m NOT doing is saying this is the only/right way to feel.  It’s how I personally feel.  I am not attacking anyone’s opinion, but I am not going to soft shoe it either and be supportive of things I don’t understand/agree with - especially when I feel it’s damaging in some way.  I am coming at this from the perspective of a Sterek shipper, and I don’t consider that a caveat at all, but rather a starting point.

1)  Within the show itself:

I think these two posts by Suaine and Qhuinn have some very valid points about HOW the start of Derek and Ms Blake’s romance begins.  It’s very cliche, much more so even than Scott overhearing Allison’s phonecall and immediately fixating on her.  That was designed to fit within the concept of werewolves, anchors, etc.  What Davis did with Derek and Ms Blake was straight up create a romantic relationship out of cheesy music and a hand stretched out in help.  More problematic is the fact that they used the heteronormative expectations of viewers to create the romantic relationship in viewer minds without ever having them speak a word to each other.  This is problematic in two-fold ways.  First, it is based not on character chemistry or flirty interactions but on heteronormative romantic tropes -  it’s purely designed to create a sense of romance with zero buildup/work.  It’s like shipping a couple from the cover of a romance novel, without bothering to read the actual book.  We all know Derek, but we don’t know Ms Blake and it’s a disservice to her character to have their romance start via cliches and not character moments.  The second reason that it is so problematic is that they did this in the season after they discovered the popularity of Sterek, a fanon romantic relationship built of on many more scenes/chemistry, etc than Derek and Ms Blake were given.  Yet Davis decided to straight up use heteronormative tropes and audience conditioning to show a het romance happening.  Knowing how much more effort has to be made for non-Sterek fans see a romantic relationship between Stiles&Derek because of those same heteronormative assumptions - despite certain similarities between this scene in 3x03 to Derek saving Stiles in 2x02 -  Davis went with the easy, heteronormative cliche route to show the start to Derek and Ms Blake’s romance.  It bugs me, because it feels like Davis decided it was just easier to write a het romance and see how fans react, then to go for the harder writing of a Sterek slowburn because it bucks the assumptions of the non-shipping audience.

Now, while I find the start to their romance extremely forced, it’s possible that in the next few eps they will have more scenes together that show their chemistry/makes it more romantic.  It was a bad start, but it could get better.  And I personally am not opposed to Derek (or Stiles) having a relationship with someone else so long as it’s transitory.  And given Jeff Davis has a bedside book titled “How to Torment Derek Hale” it would be probably the most shocking thing the show has ever done if their relationship works out.  So while it’s off to an inauspicious start, and while I’m unhappy with Davis’ choice to do it at all, I’m not going to assume I’ll hate it.  I won’t ship it, but we’ll see how the season goes.

2)  How fandom reacts:

So, I really don’t like when slash fans respond to a love interest by hating on the character purely for being a woman and love interest.  I think we’ve all seen the cardboard cutouts for characters many shows call love interests and are duly nervous - but insulting her purely for her gender is out of line.

On the other hand, I really don’t like when Sterek fans fall over themselves to show support for Derek/Ms Blake, either out of some misguided sense of fairness/not wanting to seem like a crazy shipper or because they truly like it.  Here’s where things get dicy and I’m not saying people should do this or that, my way is right, whatever.  I’m explaining my personal feeling.  You know why I don’t like it when Sterek fans support Derek/Ms Blake?  I feel like Davis is testing our resolve, seeing if he can convince people that Derek/someone else or Stiles/someone else is an acceptable substitute for Sterek, which would be harder for him to write.  I feel like every time a Sterek shipper ships Derek/Ms Blake after seeing only the cliche romantic trope of their meeting, the probability of Sterek going canon decreases a little because it’s telling Davis that it’s ok to substitute an easier het romance for a m/m romance between two not immediately identified as gay characters.  So honestly, every time I see a name on my dashboard who I know ships Sterek saying they also love Derek/Ms Blake I flinch a lot.  I’m not invalidating anyone’s right to feel that way, I’m explaining how I feel when I see it, which is a different thing.

So, my take away is not that Derek/Ms Blake is a threat to Sterek because I doubt it is long term.  It’s that I’m already side eyeing it because it didn’t start in a way that supports the characters themselves.  And it’s that I’m worried Davis is testing Sterek fans to see if he can get away with substituting a het romance instead.

This is EXACTLY why, my personal feelings aside, the fandom reaction has broken my heart yesterday.

24 May 2013


The question keeps coming up, “why don’t queer slash fans care more about canonical queer characters.”

It’s the “Did you stop beating your wife” of fandom questions. It’s leading. It’s reductionist.

There is the obvious answer — Queer fans are people, and people in general care more about main characters most directly influential to the main storyline of any tv show, book, movie, etc. The vast majority of queer characters are minor characters crammed in  for politically correct purposes, without any real character development. The few that do get actual development are usually still not central to the plot of the show. I often feel when people ask me this question that they are essentially asking me, “Why aren’t you grateful for table scraps?”


Because I’m not a fucking dog?

The few cases in which queer characters do get to be main characters central to the plot, the story usually revolves entirely around their queerness. And when I say queerness I mean gayness. Because let’s face it, no one in the media takes bisexuality seriously.

With precious few notable exceptions in niche genres, all the bisexuals on television are women. This is because the media doesn’t take female sexuality seriously. This is because the media doesn’t take women seriously. The media is going to keep dismissing bisexuality for as long as bisexuality is coded female only.


People in Teen Wolf ask, “Why aren’t you more invested in Danny? Why aren’t you fighting for him to have more backstory and more plotlines.”

As a media consumer and a pragmatist, the logic of this question is completely backwards. “Why aren’t you invested in a character that lacks flaws, motivation, depth, and for that matter anything else that might make you invested in said character? Isn’t it your moral duty as a queer/woman/POC to base all your character preferences on how similar a character’s minority status is to your own?”

I feel like the people asking these questions are asking me to choose what emotions I feel based on ideals. They’re asking me to choose between being a feminist/poc activist/queer advocate and being human.


I think of High School musical, whose entire fandom following both slash and het ships a multiracial pairing. Not out of moral duty, but because the POC in that movie series are well written and central to the plot.


Often when a show has a lot of race/sex/gender diverse cast you will hear white/cis/het people complain that the show is “trying too hard” to be diverse.

The fact is, oftentimes minority characters do seem awkwardly placed in a storyline, for the sole purpose of being politically correct. And they do feel out of place and unnecessary. And the problem isn’t that the show creators are “trying too hard.”
They’re not trying hard enough. They thought it was enough to slap on a few characters haphazardly, without fully integrating them into the storyline.


I think people need to focus more on how women/poc/queer characters are represented, instead of just focusing on how many.


No one seems to ask why lesbians read/write m/m slash.

I’ve met a lot of lesbians who read/write m/m slash.

People like to assume that slash is purely voyeurism and than compare it to “straight men watching mainstream lesbian porn.” That comparison is pure bullshit. Accusing lesbian/bisexual women of voyeuristically fetishizing gay male porn, for that matter accusing women of fetishizing men in general is like accusing black affirmative action advocates of reverse racism.

Anyone can be a bigot, but racism is bigotry + power. Sexism is bigotry+power. Transmisogyny (prejudice by cisgendered people towards transgendered/genderqueer people) is bigotry+power. Monosexism (prejudice by people attracted to one gender towards people attracted to more than one gender)  is bigotry+power. 

There’s a whole conversation  that needs to be had, about slash as escapism, rather than  voyeurism. About allegories. Not in this post. Maybe later. I have a post in  the works.

24 Feb 2012


this post is absolutely perfect
this blog is absolutely perfect

It has nothing to do with the actual lighting done on Glee, and everything with post-production. Colours are adjusted in colour-correction no matter what the original quality, to ensure fluidity throughout the show. Someone made an executive decision that this was the set of levels they wanted their post-production team to go for.
Yeah, I think it&#8217;s stupid too, but as a theatre designer it&#8217;s annoying when people assume it&#8217;s something as simple as screwing in a lightbulb.
Also - the lightbulbs for lighting instruments used in theatre and film are not as easy to change as you seem to think. Many of them will be ruined if your fingers so much as touch the glass. Most have very precise procedures for how you replace them.
The more you know!


this post is absolutely perfect

this blog is absolutely perfect

It has nothing to do with the actual lighting done on Glee, and everything with post-production. Colours are adjusted in colour-correction no matter what the original quality, to ensure fluidity throughout the show. Someone made an executive decision that this was the set of levels they wanted their post-production team to go for.

Yeah, I think it’s stupid too, but as a theatre designer it’s annoying when people assume it’s something as simple as screwing in a lightbulb.

Also - the lightbulbs for lighting instruments used in theatre and film are not as easy to change as you seem to think. Many of them will be ruined if your fingers so much as touch the glass. Most have very precise procedures for how you replace them.

The more you know!

(Source: notreallygleesecrets)

7 Jan 2012


Some notes about painting  and the bar from Inception (Arthur/Eames meta).

Remember when this popped up and we all freaked out?



Some notes about painting and the bar from Inception (Arthur/Eames meta).

Remember when this popped up and we all freaked out?

3 Jan 2012



Read More

Thank you for this.

A similar idea to the one you’re talking about here was going around a couple weeks ago and I replied/reblogged from my phone and a couple people misunderstood me so I figured I’d wait to get home and type out my feelings…

15 Dec 2011

More ranting


Things that could have saved this episode from ultimately being an infuriating trainwreck:

Read More

15 Dec 2011

What happened to equal treatment?


First, I want to thank the creators of Glee for what they have done in terms of representing homosexual teens and relationships on prime-time television. I truly appreciate it and I have seen it and even used it to help make people more aware and more accepting.

However, there are areas where Glee could and should improve in this aspect. Ryan Murphy has been outspoken about equal treatment of both the onscreen heterosexual and homosexual couples. He even ridiculed Modern Family for failing to show realistic levels of intimacy between their married homosexual couple.

“I hate it on TV shows, and there’s one show that I won’t name right now, where it’s like ‘Why aren’t these character kissing? Don’t they have a child?’ That’s ridiculous to me. I don’t understand it.”

“If I did it on my show, I would just have them do it in every scene and not have a big deal about it. I don’t think that you have to announce a very special episode. Weren’t they doing it back on Roseanne? It is just so outdated and archaic to me and as a gay man, I would never do that. I would make it very organic and do it several times and not make it a stunt.”


Sadly, it seems that Ryan Murphy and Glee have fallen prey to the very thing they criticized. 

Read More

13 Dec 2011



I really, really hope Korra does not have a love interest. She is so perfect as an independent, strong, beautiful woman who is taking on the anti-benders. Not every female, especially the lead, needs a man. I don’t even think any man can handle her. Why can’t she be friends with guys and not have them be her love interest huh? Why does everyone need to be shipped? I admit, I like to ship a lot of things, but I cannot ship Korra with anyone because she is so perfect alone. 

I am, unexpectedly, in two minds over this. On the one hand, especially as an ace person, it’s endlessly frustrating for me that romance is a given in the media, especially for women, who are often written into romance because That’s What Girls Like in a sexist way. On the other hand, the concept of taking the less conventionally feminine character and not giving her a love interest when the feminine women tended to have them springs alarms in my mind about equating ‘not gender conforming’ with ‘undesirable’.

I think a romance with Korra- a strong, independent, Chosen One female lead who isn’t adhering to beauty standards- has the potential to be subversive in the sense that those characters are frequently seen as inherently undesirable! The concept of, ‘romance for ladies is so stereotypical’ is kind of reductive, to be honest? Yet I also understand why people are frustrated that Everyone Gets Shipped.

I guess I think it depends on how they handle it either way. And likewise, this kind of attitude can easily slide into ‘women who are in love are weaker’ which basically punishes ladies/lady characters for their emotions, which I am just as sick of as I am of constant shipping? This feels a bit, ‘she’s too good for all that!’ which easily becomes ‘she’s not like those girls, she’s a better girl’.

Like, ultimately, I guess my single biggest wish is that Korra gets to have her agency respected/desires written as her own desires. And if that includes shipping, I think it could send just as important a message as if they had a single female lead. But vice versa? Also true.

Just- it goes both ways. We lack strong ladies without romance. We also lack a respect for conventionally feminine narratives like romance as valid and not degrading to a character, esp. when applied to characters that AREN’T feminine themselves! I see as much ‘UGH ROMANCE IT SUCKS STRONG LADIES DON’T FALL IN LOVE’ as I do ‘UGH WHY IS SHE SINGLE LADIES SHOULD DATE GUYS ALWAYS’.

I want her to be a lesbian ._.

12 Nov 2011

I am so sick of these “Blaine and Dave are evil, unforgivable rapists” arguments.


Yes, they’ve both done something awful.  Human beings fuck up.  A lot.  We ALL have dark impulses, we ALL have the capacity for evil, we ALL have the capacity to truly hurt the people around us.  Both Blaine and Dave have done something horrible to Kurt, and Kurt forgave them.

If the person who was wronged is willing to forgive the transgressor, and moves on and is really happy, maybe we should take his lead and drop it too?

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.  The only person who can decide if Kurt Hummel is a victim is Kurt Hummel.  No two people react to any given situation the same way.  Just because you would have acted differently, and because you would never have forgiven Dave or Blaine in Kurt’s place doesn’t mean that Kurt was wrong to do so.  Everyone deals with their feelings their own way, and we are all entitled to react in our own ways and feel our own feelings.  I get that a lot of viewers were bothered by the way the situations were handled on the show and I agree that a lot of it could definitely have been handled better.

When when the day closes, Kurt is happy with his life.  He loves Blaine and his relationship with Blaine, and has forgiven Blaine.  He has forgiven Dave, and is slowly building a friendship there.  This was Kurt’s choice to make.  He’s happy.

12 Sep 2011

Let’s talk Tina. Tina is actually an excellent feminist character. She learned early on not to let her boyfriend try and change her but accepted his apology without a grudge (“The Power of Madonna”). She supported Artie through his struggles but still stated her opinions when she felt it necessary (“Dream On”). She stood up for her own individuality (“Theatricality”) and expressed a healthy attitude towards sex (“Never Been Kissed”). She vocally opposed Rachel’s plan to get a nose job (the only female to do so) and declared herself an Asian sex symbol (“Born This Way”). She spent an episode on the football team, and was the one female character who actually stood up and ran with the ball (“The Sue Sylvester Bowl Shuffle”). She’s ballsy and unafraid to speak her mind, yet still sensitive and compassionate - and points more for Mike, her boyfriend, appearing to love her that way.

Basically, Tina’s a well-rounded female character, currently in a healthy relationship - but the writers hardly ever use her, or Mike. She’s had one storyline independent of a male character in the entire series’ run (“Theatricality”) and Season 2 found her dialogue mostly on the topic of being Asian, or being infatuated with Mike. This wouldn’t be so bad if Tina were afforded more. But it’s simply not there - the writers didn’t even let her finish a solo onscreen in Season 2. And when Tina is involved in storyline, of course, her representation slides: she accuses Brittany and Mike of cheating in “Special Education,” and randomly dresses up like a cheerleader to try and hold onto her boyfriend. (This from the girl who blackmailed the principal of her school so she could keep dressing the way she wanted. Uh, okay.)

— Dr. Shebloggo on all the reasons why I love Tina Cohen-Chang in “Gender and Glee: Feminism and the Presence of Character.” 

(Source: icanpopnlock)