Jump to content
🔒 The Earwolf Forums are closed Read more... ×

taylor anne photo

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    3661

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    108

Posts posted by taylor anne photo

  2. Posted

    23 minutes ago, theworstbuddhist said:

    Clueless was based on Jane Austen's "Emma," I assume they preserved the relationships from the book. But yeah, weird that they would.

    In the original story Mr. Knightly (the Paul Rudd character) is Emma's sister's brother-in-law, so there's even less of a relation there than if they had been two people who's parents were married. I know that's like the only way to basically like modernize that kind of thing, especially since they cut out any siblings from Cher's family, but it feels like a thing they didn't have to mention as many times as they do lol.

    • Like 2

  3. Posted

    2 minutes ago, gigi-tastic said:

    I am trash and love to hate watch the Teen Mom franchise and one of the couples on there are also stepsiblings. They were dating before their parents though? Thankfully said parents are divorced now. It's still super weird.

    Like legit I don't get the sexual taboo desire of it all and I'm not sure I ever will, but like that movie I watched and then even this instance you can kinda see how it happens. But you're so right it does still seem so weird.

    It's like in Clueless too! Cher and Josh used to be step siblings but then their parents divorced and yet she still refers to him as her step brother. THEN THEY END UP TOGETHER! You never like notice that shit at first because you just want Alicia Silverstone and Paul Rudd together and then you get older and you think about all of that shit, like also the fact that he's definitely at least 19 and she's 16 and it's definitely even weirder lol.

    • Like 2

  5. Posted

    7 hours ago, gigi-tastic said:

    I am kind of fascinated by this trend in porn.  I loved reading Mary Roch's book Boink on sex and sexual science and would honestly love to read a study on 1. Trends in porn and 2. Why THIS trend specifically?  Is it because that now there in the are billions of choices in porn we are desensitized by what was once thrilling sexually and now have to tread into more taboo ( but still on the surface "ok" vanilla sex with people who technically share only familial relationships not actually blood relatives. Not that it's ok in real life but the situation is more palatable?) ? Or is it something that was kind of a thing that porn makers then decided this is the hot new trend like a fashion magazine might do? Either way I need ANSWERS damnit! If only to put my confused mind to rest.

    This just reminded me that I watched this Swedish movie on Netflix called "Kiss Me" or "Kyss Mig" about two adult women who are about to become step sisters and they end up falling in love with each other. It's definitely painted as "oh this isn't right" the whole time but, no spoilers I promise, it's really well told and extremely beautiful to watch.

    Or it could be another Adore situation where I'm totally fine watching something and everyone else is like wtf that's creepy lmao. (Not that I watch that kind of porn that's indeed way gross and I'm not into that lol.)

    • Like 1

  7. Posted

    1 hour ago, Cameron H. said:

    Because it was part of my “multiple points” :) You said: 

    But none of those things are mutually exclusive. They don’t contradict each other. And each was in response to a different person, in a different post, regarding a different aspect of Twilight. The quote you pulled of mine up there was in response to things EvRobert brought up. I don’t know why you read that as if it were directed at you or anyone else here.

    Last night, I was juggling different conversations with you, EvR, Almost a Ghost, Watch Out for Snakes, Grudlian, and SyCasey. I was carefully reading each of your posts and responding as quickly as I could while also doing other “in real life” things. If things sound “muddled,” I don’t know what to tell you. If Person A brings something up, and I respond to them that maybe it would help to view the work as a whole, it has nothing to do with conversation I’m having with Person B about intention versus interpretation. Those are totally different topics. Each with different “points” ;) 

    Of course, sometimes there’s overlap, and it’s not perfect, but that’s just the nature of online conversations. I understand you’re all arguing the same general point, but I’m not looking at is as me talking with a group of five people. I try to treat each of you as an individual that deserves my undivided attention.Â ï»ż

    I guess then really the whole thing comes down to miscommunications. Cause to me I was kinda like viewing this as all of us sitting in a circle and discussing together, but if you're viewing it as separate one on one conversations, then things can get disastrously confusing because of that disconnect between us lol. I apologize for coming off so hostile, but I definitely still stand by everything I think :P 

    • Like 1

  8. Posted

    10 minutes ago, Cameron H. said:

    Damn, I really want to be done with this conversation, but I don’t remember ever saying this...

    I totally understand that, and I didn't quote you exactly right there but here's what I read -

    20 hours ago, Cameron H. said:

    But I feel like most of the criticism about them has to do with a backlash against literature aimed for women rather than anything truly substantive

    Now re-reading this it does appear that you were making a very broad statement that revolved around criticisms not in this thread directly, but it was very confusing to me and so I thought you were specifically talking about our criticisms here and I was like... what the fuck?

    That's a lot of the issues I was having, because it appeared you were directly saying our opinions and criticisms weren't valid because they didn't have anything substantive involved, and even if you weren't I'm not exactly sure why those criticisms were being brought up in response to ours.

  9. Posted

    20 minutes ago, Cameron H. said:

     I am nitpicking Twilight. I am citing specific scenes and using other books and movies to support what I am saying - just like we always do. I just happen to be nitpicking against everyone else’s opinion (which always seems to upset people) So I’ll stop. No big deal.

    And in my defense, not once did I say or come close to suggesting we should ignore it and let it continue to be. That’s putting words in my mouth. My point from the beginning has always been, that they are bad, just no worse than other things that have come before it, so why do people feel the need to particular series? It reminds me of the same stigma Romance Novels get all the time. I’m also merely pointing out that it’s a four book series that should be taken as a whole and not from isolated moments from an earlier book meant to represent the entirety of the work and the author’s philosophy.

    But I will happily drop it. ;) 

    Then I believe your points are getting muddled because I feel like I've read "My point is..." a million times and it seems like a different point each time. It's either that Stephanie meant it to be taken a different way than intended, then it's that the series is getting dog-piled on, then it's that it should be taken as a whole not isolated moments. So now I'm very confused as to what we're actually discussing here.

    I didn't mind that we all disagreed about Stephanie's intentions and whether or not it mattered because outcome outweighs intention, but once you started then claiming that those that followed this series like gospel were dumb because dumb people will be dumb, it felt important to bring up that hi hello I was one of those dumb kids and this is why it's important to talk about this series being toxic. Then you mentioned that people are always railing on this and not other things, but that shouldn't even have any baring on this very specific conversation since it's literally related to the movie we just watched. This is where I started to feel dismissed, because at that point it didn't seem to matter what any of us said because you had already stayed in your thought that it was only because it's easy to pick on, and I felt like you weren't actually taking in anything that had been said about the experiences. I mean you literally said that the arguments lacked substance which was wild to me and made me feel absolutely like there was almost little point to even discussing this further because at that point then I guess literally nothing I brought to the table mattered. So then later when you brought up the fans being dismissed I had to comment on that because literally I was that fan, and I have the proof of following the phenomenon from one end to the other (I stayed up all night to try and meet Robert Pattinson at a god damn MALL... didn't work).

    Basically as a female representative of this fandom, I'm literally telling you that this conversation went down a terrible rabbit hole and I felt incredibly awful by last night. Like I still don't mind that you saw something different in these books/movies, but since the target demo was teenage girls and that was me, I'm just asking that you respect that maybe what I saw and what I experienced has a little more weight behind it.

    Also I know that I said that was the last thing I was going to say, but y'all should know me well enough by now that that never happens LOL.

    ETA: If I did put words in your mouth I do apologize for that. It's definitely harder to read tone and when things are a bit confusing it's absolutely possible to think one thing when you meant something different.

    • Like 1

  10. Posted

    54 minutes ago, Cameron H. said:

    I'm just saying that for that  the conceit of a "Dickish, handsome, rich man that treats the female protagonist like dirt, but is actually an okay dude so you should probably just marry him" isn't unique to Twilight. It's at least as old as Pride and Prejudice, and probably older still, but people still love Mr D'arcy. You say that Stephanie Meyers should have known better, but what of the thousands of other examples of problematic relationships in literature that existed before her? Why don't they get called out? That's my point.

    This is the last thing I'm going to say about this topic because I feel like we're talking in circles here, but WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWILIGHT BECAUSE THIS IS A TWILIGHT THREAD!

    Should we watch Pride and Prejudice and nitpick that? Would you like to go through other examples? Cause right now I don't give a shit about any other examples that prove as to why we should all stop and just let this happen. You can claim that people shit on Twilight over and over because it's an "easy target" but then I guess we shouldn't have watched this movie to begin with if you didn't want us to pick out the things we find problematic about it.

    • Like 1

  11. Posted

    30 minutes ago, Cameron H. said:

    I’m just fighting against knee-jerkism and dog piling. People are so quick to dismiss a very popular book series - and by extension it’s legion of fans.

    But no one here is doing that. We all happen to have very specific feelings about this series, and I don't see the point in going against them because you think it's not well thought out. You're speaking to us as if we're all in the same boat of those who rag on the fans online and dismiss them (mostly because of their gender). I'm here telling you I was one of those fans and that I feel my feelings on this very popular book series are being dismissed literally right now.

    • Like 1

  13. Posted

    1 minute ago, AlmostAGhost said:

    Not to nitpick... but I need to point out that that's exactly what anecdotal evidence is - basing it on what you personally experience over actual research.

    But I will add, anecdotal can be valid as a form of interpretation, as it is here... it's not like you're saying 'well my cancer went away because I drank vinegar'.

    Fair and valid. People usually yell about anecdotal evidence when they're hearing something second hand so I'm very used to it only being used in that sense. I promise this isn't second hand info lol.

  14. Posted

    1 hour ago, Cameron H. said:

    But that goes back to my previous points. The Twilight books weren’t trying to show us a healthy relationship. And I think viewing it as such is wrong. They were showing a relationship teenagers could relate to in their real lives. (“I know a guy like Jacob. He’s so nice. Im just not into him like that.” “I love my boyfriend but sometimes he can be so possessive.”)

    The ideal relationship (at least according to Meyers) doesn’t occur until the final book/movie. No one should be looking at Twilight or New Moon and expect that what they’re seeing is True Love. If that were the case, there would only be one book. 

    Idk I still don't think I agree with that solely because these two still end up together. Sure they grow, but that's their perfectly structured fictional relationship and I still think it's setting women up for something not right, because men aren't Edward and they're not going to get their fairy tale ending. I think she's packaging the whole "oh don't worry if you see red flags, girls, he'll grow because of you and change!" and selling it to teenagers.

    I legit asked my friends cause I'm still in the same friend group from high school and they just answered that while they didn't think it was normal behavior they definitely didn't think it was either alarming or creepy at all. Actually one of them just got her masters in psychology and said her supervisor at her clinic uses it as her "bad relationship" example with her teen clients. She said quote, "Every girl is like oh I thought that was just how it always is." 

    I still am not saying it's all Twilight's fault, but because of the fact that it is so huge it definitely has more reach than other examples, especially since it's there specifically for teenage girls.

    ETA: Also, while I disagree with Meyers intentions, to me none of that matters anyway. She could legit wanted us all to see that, but the point is teen girls are seeing Edward as romantic. They are seeing these actions become normalized. They are falling into dangerous situations because they saw it played out in front of them. Call it dumb people being dumb all you want but when it's enough girls for therapists and counselors to actually reference it, then it's more than that.

    • Like 1

  15. Posted

    5 minutes ago, Cameron H. said:

    Yes, and you turned out alright. Taylor read Twilight in High School and now she’s a badass :) 

    I think we are worrying too much on what we think might happen when people read stuff with problematic elements than what actually does happen. Intelligent people will be fine. Dumb people will always be dumb.

    Yeah I'm a badass now. Imagine me back in the day though. Ugh wildly annoying LOL!

    No but seriously, this is an interesting topic to discuss and it brings up a lot of points of whether or not fiction has any responsibility for what it portrays, and to me I think it does.

    I think back onto how Whoopi Goldberg never would have become who she was if she hadn't seen Nichelle Nichols on TV, or how even Nichelle wouldn't have taken that job if MLK Jr hadn't called her and told her how important she was going to be for black kids all across the nation. I think about how much someone like Tess Holliday actually being a plus sized woman gracing the cover of Cosmo would've blown my fucking mind if I had seen it as this chubby girl in high school seeing nothing but stick thin "heroin chic" bull shit and hating my own body. It's the same as to why we see men taking the wrong message from Travis in Taxi Driver, and it's why I took the wrong message from something like Twilight and some other things I had been reading and watching at the time and let myself be taken down the path of toxic relationships because that's what appeared normal.

    Like, obviously we can't all blame it on Twilight, cause listen I'll keep it 100 that my parents were not the beacon of "True Love" and I have some major trust issues from them lmao, but I do think that authors/screenwriters/showrunners/directors do have to take some of the responsibility for perpetuating ideals that are more harmful than good. No one is perfect, yes, but if we don't call out shit then nothing will change.

  16. Posted

    9 minutes ago, Cameron H. said:

    I’m not saying that they AREN’T problematic. I’m saying that they are no more problematic then a lot of stuff. Everything from Romeo & Juliet to The Hunger Games has shit that’s problematic. Twilight just gets picked on more - especially, but not exclusively, by dudes. There are antecedents to everything in the Twilight books, but as a culture, for some reason, we decided they were going to be our punching bag.

    You both brought up anecdotes of people who emulated Bella and Edward-esque relationship traits. Well, kids used to tie sheets around their necks and jump of their roofs trying to fly like Superman. Some people are just dumb and miss the point, but I don’t think we need to ban Superman or suggest that the writers are failing our children.

    I mean, are the books poorly written? Absolutely, but that didn’t stop them from being massively successful. Are they lasting pieces of literature? Honestly, I don’t know. What I can say is that we’re still talking about them 10 years after the fact. That’s pretty goddamn impressive. So who knows? (Do people even talk about The Hunger Games anymore?) Are the movies bad? Well, they made a ton of money (mostly from dumb people who hated them apparently 😜). They were covered on HDTGM? So are the Fast and Furious movies. And, as I recall, Paul, Jason, and Doug admitted to not only liking the last one, but crying at the end!

    This is what I’m going to say: Twilight is not perfect. There are flaws. Sure. But all movies have flaws. There will always be problematic elements. Hell, all the movies I love have flaws. Indiana Jones, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Marvel movies, they are all deeply flawed and problematic. However, the flaws are fun to discuss and pick apart while you’re watching them for the zillionth time. It’s part of what makes them special. It’s the piling on that I object to. Twilight is just fine. It just gets it worse than other genre fiction. 

    Alright, I see what you're saying now, but I think what we're getting hung up on here is the fact that we are indeed talking about Twilight specifically in this instance, so obviously it's going to be our punching bag. If we were going over Hunger Games I would talk about fucking Liam Hemsworth's character who's name I keep forgetting as the other epitome of WAH FRIENDZONED AND FUCK HER CHOICES RAH!

    And I would have to say that this isn't just anecdotal evidence. I lived it.

    There's truly a difference in people being stupid and thinking they can fly, and then the representation of men and women and hetero relationships effecting the youth.

    Also, I'm not sure any of us were saying that these problematic flaws are the reason why we don't like these films/books (for me at least I can't speak to anyone else that has chimed in). In fact, before I recognized the problematic nature to this relationship I had realized they just weren't good lol. That's not the point I think any of us were trying to make. It's just that we happened to watch the last movie (which I actually really enjoyed) and were pointing out the things we don't like about this series now.

    • Like 1

  17. Posted

    6 minutes ago, EvRobert said:

    I also think it's easy to pick on the TWILIGHT books because, well they're not poorly written but they will never be mistaken fro great literature or have a timelessness that other books would have. 
     

    That's not Stephanie Meyer's fault and that's not to unfairly criticize or malign her.There just isn't a lasting quality there. There's a lot of worse YA fiction that made worse movies and worse books (don't get me started on Christopher Paloni and the Eragorn series). Other works of literature and movies and art can have a lasting impression, if there are better made. 

    the problem is that is sometimes harder to spot the problematic elements in better written/better produced work because, at least for me personally, I get caught up in the craft and the art. 

    As a theater person and a film person, there is a lot I love about David Mamet because I get caught up in the craft of his work, and as a result I find it hard to look at his more problematic elements, as far as his worldview and him as a person. i've gotten better at it as he has become more and more of a toxic person. But god damn if the man can't write.

    These are excellent points. Also, I think that for a lot of stuff that has been held so highly we're truly just now seeing it for what it really is. I mean I legitimately didn't think of Taxi Driver as problematic until the last two years, again because I think it just wasn't taught to us that way and we're all slowly realizing it. And Twilight just happens to be the thing made specifically for teenage girls that blew the fuck up and became a phenomenon that also happens to have some not okay stuff that even I didn't really was not okay until I was in my 20s, well after I had read the books and digested all the material.

  18. Posted

    4 minutes ago, Cameron H. said:

    Well, then let’s just go ahead and throw away all Fiction and Art ever created that’s based on a person’s upbringing, beliefs, and religion. Did Burgess write A Clockwork Orange because he hoped people would emulate Alex? People idolize Travis Bickle (for the wrong reasons) so I guess Taxi Driver is completely devoid of merit.

    I think it's very interesting you brought these two up and I understand why. You'll have to point me to where people were saying that those who love the books were trying to specifically emulate Bella because I do think I missed the start of that topic, because my point is just teaching girls what is acceptable behavior when it comes to a relationship. But with these two and Twilight together - one was definitely viewed as bad (hence why the two parter series finale made it onto HDTGM) and the other two are seen as literally the best of the best (hence why they are being covered on Unspooled instead), and I do think that goes to the points you made in your next paragraph that there is this animosity towards fiction directed wholly towards females. However, I'm not seeing as to why that means none of the criticisms have any substance? I have the same issues with Twilight that I do with ACWO and Taxi Driver because no matter the intentions of the artists behind the works, the outcome is the same, shitty people doing shitty things because of the media they are digesting.

  19. Posted

    10 minutes ago, Cameron H. said:

    But it’s also a fairy tale book about vampires and werewolves. I don’t think any impressionable teens are walking away from Twilight thinking, “I sure wish Timmy would break into my room tonight and stare at me while I sleep. Then I know he loves me.” He’s supposed to be creepy, weird, and off-putting. What would be the point of making him just like a normal teenager? If that were the case, then you might as well just write a story about two regular old teens falling in love. All the creepy things he does feeds into Bella’s unease. She’s not right off the bat like, “I love him.” She’s drawn to him but afraid of him - which is something in every vampire book and story ever written.

    So, yes, if we’re talking real life, totally. It’s really problematic. But with narrative shorthand, we get that he’s probably okay pretty much right away. It’s just like we get Mr D’Arcy is okay long before it’s actually revealed or how we know Prince Charming isn’t just some creep who likes to kiss dead women.

    Okay, but as a 16 year old in this time I can wholeheartedly say that teenage girls are stupid enough to eat this shit up and wish dudes would act like that. It's a fairy tale, but when fairy tales are some of our only representation of teenage romance, then that's all we start to see as truth. This is the problem with stuff like that. Until we can get proper stuff in front of kids' eyes then we can't actually chalk this up to just being a fairy tale and therefore none of it is accurate. Edward is still supposed to be a 17 year old, and so it does teach girls that these actions are okay from men, because they saw Edward do it. Like I promise you I'm writing this all from genuine experience. It took going through extremely toxic relationships and growing up to realize those actions are not okay, because no one told me otherwise.

    • Like 2

  21. Posted

    5 minutes ago, Cameron H. said:

    In defense of these movies/books, I will say they really work better as a complete series. To @taylorannephoto‘s point about them sending a “terrifying message” to teenage girls, that’s only true if you think Meyer’s point was to say, “Girls, this is what you should be aspiring toward” which I would argue she’s definitely not. She calls Bella out constantly on her bullshit. Bella is the protagonist, but she’s not meant to be a hero to be emulated. She fucks up. She does dumb things. She’s stubborn and petulant. All things teenagers - and adults - can relate to. It’s not about saying, “Here’s a person you should be,” it’s about, “Here’s a person just like you, who feels insecure and helpless and ugly and dumb.” ï»ż

    Nor is it  saying, “If a person breaks up with you, be reckless,” it’s saying, “I understand what it’s like to hurt. You may want to do something stupid. I get that. I won’t judge you.” Hell, that resonates with me - an adult man. When my first “love” and I broke up, I was a mess for months and months and certainly in no position to be anyone’s role model. That’s what the books provide. That’s where the connection is. 

    As far as her criticisms of her personality, I mean, that’s her journey! The movies aren’t about beheadings and hardcore battles. If that’s what you’re looking for or want to see, then you and the movie are speaking two totally different languages. There is a journey. But it’s an internal journey into maturity. She starts off as an insecure person and becomes a self-confident badass. It’s just crazy to me to expect a person on page one of a four book series to be the same person they are on the last page of the last book. People give her so much shit for who her character is in the beginning, but never stop to reevaluate her as the movies progress. It would be like hating Han Solo in The Force Awakens because he was a cocky, mercenary piece of shit in A New Hope. Sometimes, it seems like Bella is the only literary character that’s expected to be an absolutely flawless character from the word go - and that’s bullshit. 

    Ultimately, Bella is not meant to be a role model. And I don’t think it’s Stephanie Meyers intention or her responsibility to make her one. She’s just Bella. She’s offering the point of view of a normal, sullen, emotional teenager. It’s no wonder that adults struggle to connect with that, but I don’t think it’s right to be outright dismissive of that point of view either. Just because it doesn’t speak to you, doesn’t mean it doesn’t speak to someone.

    I don't think she's saying that Bella is to be emulated, no, but she is painting this romance as True Love, and everything that Bella does in response to this True Love or how Edward treats her in the beginning under the guise of True Love, is terrifying and problematic af.

    She may call it out to some degree, but she never stands with that calling out in my opinion. Edward full on stalks her, breaks into her home, and watches her while she sleeps and even when Bella first begins to think there's something wrong with that idea it's not because it's creepy and a giant RED FUCKING FLAG it's because she is starting to catch on that he is a vampire, and after that it's pushed aside as anything other than his loving and protecting nature.

    • Like 2

  22. Posted

    19 minutes ago, EvRobert said:

    It really is a curious thing to me, I suppose to a degree it could e like when I saw the first (THE FIRST) GI Joe movie. I came out and was like "it reminded me of when I was a kid smashing my GI Joes together!". Maybe there is just something  in types of media that reverts us back to a particular moment in our childhood and a longing for such?

    I do also think it has something to do with this desire for someone to come and save us from our boring lives. Everyone wants to be the kid under the stairs that suddenly finds out he's a wizard, or wants to be the One girl this vampire falls in love with, cause then it means there's more to life then whatever boring shit you have to deal with day to day lol.

  23. Posted

    17 minutes ago, EvRobert said:

    @taylorannephoto you said that you were at the right age for the Twilight books when the first one came out, but I've always wondered why people like my friend, who was a mom in her mid 30s or so, why those books connected with so many women their age.

    It's a really good question. Like at least with Magic Mike or 50 Shades of Grey there's this like almost housewife-esque aspect that it is catering to more so than the obvious teenage demo that things like Twilight are trying to get to.

  24. Posted

    24 minutes ago, EvRobert said:

    I'm not even a fan of Kristen Stewart in these films, I found her dull and boring, it wasn't until Adventureland that I really started to like her as an actress, and then I found one of her early films (the one she did with David Gordon Green and produced by Terrance Malick) that I really liked her. She's still hit and miss for me but at least I know she can act.

    She did a made-for-Showtime movie pre-Twilight based off a book I LOVEEE called "Speak" that she's genuinely amazing in with Steve Zahn. You wouldn't think reading those two names together would prove for quality but it's this gorgeous little indie movie about a teenage girl dealing with the aftermath of being raped and it's beautifully told. Zahn plays her art teacher that helps her find her outlet to express all of her feelings.

  25. Posted

    The fight is in the last book but it's also a Non-Fight Fight. Meaning Alice sees how it went down and shows Michael Sheen and you think while reading it that it's actually happening but then lmao nah.

    I've mentioned before that when these came out I was the EXACT age they were intended for. I was 15 when Twilight was first released so my friends and I ate it The. Fuck. Up. But it wasn't until Breaking Dawn came out when we were all 18 that we finally realized there was something wrong with the series. Looking back on it now, especially now that the movies are out, it's incredibly toxic, and I would say that I disagree with Cameron that New Moon improves on the toxicity, because the amount of times she puts herself near death for a man really is a terrifying message for 16 year old girls to be reading/seeing. But honestly I tried to re-read the books to see if I was still right that they were a good read, and no... they weren't. I couldn't make it through the first chapter again after having the veil pulled from my head lol. This is a terrible story LOL.

×