katnissisoliveskinneddealwithit:

Real, Not Real by ~eightbreeze

gingerhaze:

One last thing for Valemtimes before it’s over - a lil Peeta and Katniss from the “Fictional Couples” commission series!

ratgirlstudios:

I had planned to have this up to coincide with the DVD release last Saturday, but wasn’t able to get it finished in time. It’s finished now though, so here’s my art nouveau (ish) Katniss Everdeen.

#FOUR FOR YOU BROWN KATNISS #YOU GO BROWN KATNISS

nadiyah’s tag for hunger games fanart is the best tag for hunger games fanart

moments later you spy a brown Katniss and you rejoice! Such a thing is an object to treasure. You slosh through the stream, leaving text posts and the occasional feminist quote in your wake, tumbling the waves with each pump of your knees. Ah, yes, fanart of Brown Katniss. You remember that your two favorite things right now are Korra and Katniss, and the narratives are good, and the fandoms are good, and the fanart is amazing, and you lean back and decide to float. Such is life on the Tumblstream.

more hunger games 

angelsshouldnevertouchtheground:

pulpofiction:

angelsshouldnevertouchtheground:

pulpofiction:

I swear that at some point I’m going to stop posting hunger games so prolifically but today is not that day. LET’S TALK ABOUT IMPERIAL ROME, EH?

[original post]

I agree with you on all points except one: THG being a feminist book. The definition for feminism is “ Belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes.” So, yes, it is a book about power and defeating the communist government in control. But it is in no way about feminism. The sexes are equal in Panem. In fact, they’re incredibly equal proven by Finnick in Mockingjay admitting to the fact that he was used as a male prostitute. If this was a sexist government, that would have never happened because even in Communist countries, men are often held a little higher than women. It is a book about power, but feminism and power are not synonymous.

There is a difference between the theoretical interpretation of the text and what the text portrays in narrative. Yes, Panem looks to be a relatively equal society regarding sex and gender. The interpretation and meaning of the text is what is feminist. Katniss struggles for agency in a world that would deny it to her. Is it important that she’s a female character? Yes. Books don’t exist in a vacuum. We must look at these books in the context of our society. They’re not closed sets. They have to be held up and compared to our current conditions in order to construct any kind of relevant or meaningful interpretation.

There’s lots of feminist literature that doesn’t take place in an ‘equal’ world. Margaret Atwood’s ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ features a sexist and chauvinistic government, in which the main character is a concubine whose sole purpose is to reproduce. Despite the sexist society in which the narrative takes place, no one would deny that this is definitely a feminist book. The setting of the book is not a direct representation or image of the meaning of the book.

In the same sense, just because the main character is female does not mean it’s feminist.

[tw: sexist slurs]

okay, two things -

1. Like I said, books don’t exist in a vacuum. It IS important that Katniss is an action heroine who isn’t diminished to sexy toyness, and it is important that this is a narrative about an action heroine who fights for the right to self-define. If Katniss were male, half the point would be moot. (White) men in the United States does not have to fight for representation or the free will to choose their own paths, the right to live outside of gendered constructs that limit them by targeting their emotional behavior, the right to determine what they want to do with their own bodies. This book, a book about a woman fighting to not be used or objectified and fighting to be an agent of her own desires, exists in a society where women must fight not to be used or objectified and to be agents of their own desires. The message of the story would be undermined if the main character were a male, because the lives and experiences of men are over-represented in society, and they have much greater agency than us ladies.

Also, pro-tip: Panem isn’t a Communist government. It is a fascist government. The two are not one and the same, but often exist in the same space.

2. Just because Katniss doesn’t kick Peeta in the balls at the end of Mockingjay while shouting I DONT NEED NO MAN YOU CHAUVINIST PIG and then run off to shave her head and live a life of wild promiscuous lesbian bondage sex with Johanna and Annie (orgasms for everyone!) and then they all find work in the Capitol Planned Parenthood as atheist strippers, forcing Good Moral Girls to learn about sexual health and birth control and abortion, turning them into VILE IMMORAL WHORE SLUTS!, doesn’t mean it’s NOT feminist.

I know this might seem hard, but feminism isn’t a bad thing.

Now, excuse me, I have to go sacrifice a kitten to Gloria Steinem on Ronald Reagan’s grave. 

more hunger games nonsense 

Hey, you know that thing where Katniss is the Mockingjay, and mockingjays are compelled to sing the songs of other people? She’s just continually fed lines to read off to the public, cultivated into a reflection of the revolution’s goals and a mouthpiece for their ideas.

After she kills President Coin, who only wanted to use her for political gain, and gets hospitalized, she sings at the top of her lungs nonstop in her room.

She’s stopped repeating other people’s words for them and she’s finally singing for herself. She is officially no longer a Mockingjay. The first time Katniss actively chooses to sing for herself - not for anyone else, just herself - after her father dies is the moment she has taken power back for herself. She has a voice. 

goddamnit katniss is the greatest

Peeta is ALSO a Mockingjay, because when he gets hijacked, he, like Katniss, gets turned into a mouthpiece, but for the gain of Capitol (and involuntarily, duh.) MJ is just as much about him being the Mockingjay as it is about Katniss being the Mockingjay. And while the point of the end of MJ is that both the Capitol and District 13 are bad/evil/destructively inhumane governments, at least District 13 doesn’t have to brainwash their Mockingjay into doing it. I feel like this is a parallel that gets sort of overlooked. I was wondering why, narratively, Peeta had to be brainwashed in MJ, and I realized that the Capitol and District 13 both needed to have people to publicly champion their causess and defend their positions. And of the people they had, who better for the Capitol to use than Peeta?

this all happened as I was zoning out in class oops