Realizing it’s not romance that I hate but overdone straight relationships with zero chemistry built on a slew of misogynistic tropes was like a huge revelation for me
I have a story about this.
My revelation regarding this was spurred by a little-known film that actually didn’t do very well in theatres at all, from the early 90s called Corina Corina.
Starring heartthrob of the time Ray Liotta, fresh off his Goodfellas fame and…..Whoopie Goldberg??? as his love interest??????
Bear with me here.
Corina Corina is the story about a man whose wife died, leaving him alone to parent his 8-9 year old daughter alone in what appears to be the late 50s-early 60s. His daughter, Molly, is non-verbal due to the trauma of her mother’s death and is dealing with feelings of isolation as a result of her mourning process. Ray Liotta’s character makes a concentrated effort to be a good dad for her, but it’s real clear that both of them are still dealing with the death of his wife. Because Ray’s character works full time, he needs to find a nanny to watch his girl and pick her up from school. After a couple of terrible experiences (one with a hilarious appearance by Joan Cusack) he decides to hire Whoopie Goldberg.
Whoopie Goldberg’s character is a college educated black woman (in the 50s!!!!) who appears to be doing domestic work because its the only work white 50s America will hire her for. She and Ray’s daughter Molly get along well because she is the first person to take Molly’s decision to be non-verbal seriously and learn an alternate way to communicate with her.
Long story short, Whoopie Goldberg and Ray Liotta fall in love and live happily ever after.
But, more importantly, the way the movie built their love changed the way I was able to process hetero couples on screen forever.
1. First, they were both provided with alternate romance options from the beginning of the movie. Ray was given an extremely attractive white lady love interest, and Whoopie was given an attractive and charming black man love interest. Both of them were given opportunities to return their affection but both pointedly chose not to.
2. They were attracted to each other based on common interest. They both liked the same music, they both bonded over their ability to play the piano, they both loved molly, they both helped encourage each other in their chosen fields (whoopie’s was english, and ray’s was being a songwriter), they both respected each other’s opinions and they both were honest with each other about the circumstances they were in.
3. They were realistic about the issue of a black woman being in a relationship with a white man in the era, and didn’t glide over racial identity issues. Ray made sure that his white neighbors knew that he loved her and didn’t care what they thought. He even explained to his mom that Molly emulating black culture wasn’t shameful and that she should mind her business about the way he felt about Whoopie Goldberg.
4. When Ray confessed his feelings, it was incredibly heartfelt and he was literally crying.
5. They didn’t pursue a romantic relationship until Whoopie wasn’t working for him anymore. And they didn’t gloss over the issue of power disparity in that equation. Ray doesn’t condescend to Whoopie at all through the movie, but once he’s aware he has feelings for her, his new goal is to let her know that he unquestionably considers her his equal both in private and in public And its clear that he’s aware that this is the first thing that must be settled before anything else.
By the time you get to the end of the movie, the entire concept of Ray Liotta being with Whoopie Goldberg seems not only normal, but exceptionally romantic and you’re left wondering why you thought they would be a gross couple to begin with when they’re sO cLeArLy MaDe fOr eAcH oThEr
I now call this the Corina Corina standard.
If a movie has a hetero couple and their relationship isn’t as fleshed out as Ray/Whoopie, I now have difficulty accepting whats occurring.
The concept that two hot straight people who are vaguely near each other just doesn’t do it for me anymore after watching Ray Liotta walk through a black neighborhood in the 50s and knock on Whoopie’s door to beg her to come home to him.
So many Pro-Spanking advocates talk about how they “Deserved” to be hit by their parents because they were “a bad kid.” And it makes me so sad.
You weren’t.
You weren’t a bad kid, and you didn’t deserve to be hit. Maybe you were a difficult kid, maybe you struggled with boundaries or rules or expectations. Maybe you had bad behavior much of the time. But you, yourself, were not and are not a BAD person for that, and you didn’t EARN violence. You didn’t have it coming. It shouldn’t have happened to you.
Sometimes kids need to be bopped Not hit violently. Just bopped, when nothing else you try is working.
No. Children do not NEED to be hit, for any reason. Children never deserve violence.
Anecdote time. I was spanked as a kid. Well, “spanked” was the word my mother and her sister used for it. Sounds like I was being lightly hit on the bottom by my mother’s hand, doesn’t it?
What my mother actually hit me with was a thick leather belt cut into strips. She called it her cat-o-nine-tails. And she hit hard enough to leave welts on my back and my ass that lasted for a week. If she was in an especially mean mood–which happened a couple of times–she walloped me with the buckle end. The buckle was huge and outsized with sharp edges and had a long tongue that left gouges. If I got cut or gouged during the spanking, I was not supposed to bandage the wounds or to ask my aunt to bandage them. I found that out after asking my aunt for such help once because I didn’t want my clothes sticking to the wounds. My mother threw a shit fit that is perhaps better left to the imagination. Truthfully, I don’t remember what she said; I only recall her unholy rage and her conviction that I deserved it.
That was the norm when I was a kid. Every kid that I knew–boys and girls–was hit. Few parents of my friends “spanked” with hands. I can recall several mothers sitting in the kitchen of a friend’s family and boasting over coffee about how many yardsticks they had broken against their daughters’ backs or legs. Fathers talked openly, even proudly, about “belting” their sons with actual belts.
This wasn’t seen as abuse, although every kid I knew hated being hit and hated their parents for hitting them. Some of us begged our parents not to. Others tried to run away. Still others had anxiety attacks whenever their parents got angry. None of it mattered.The euphemistic “spanking” was continually presented to us as good, if strict, parenting. And after all, weren’t there days that kids were completely unreasonable and nothing else would work? And you couldn’t really expect adults to talk to kids as if they were people, could you? That, we were told,would be a waste of time. The best thing to do was simply to admit you deserved it and accept the spanking. And not to cry afterward, because crying was for babies. (My mother’s policy was that if a blow from her belt made me cry, she would hit me even harder until I admitted that there was nothing to cry about and stopped.)
I stole the belt belt one summer day when I was ten. I wrapped it around the inside of a garbage can and concealed it behind three heavy bags of trash. My mother put it out for the garbage men the following morning and never knew it. She spent months looking for it; I saw the signs when she searched my room. But it never occurred to her that she herself had thrown it away, and since she assumed that she’d get it back eventually, she never bothered to replace it. And I, of course, never told her; by that time, I felt that I was justified in doing whatever I had to to survive her silences and rages.
“Spanking” didn’t teach me or my friends to behave, or to be better disciplined, though for years I believed both because thinking of it as normalized physical abuse was unbearable. It taught us that adults were irrational and untrustworthy, and that even the best of them wouldn’t step in to prevent cruelty or injustice. It taught us to repress our tears and to believe that we deserved to be beaten (the word we used among ourselves to describe spankings). We learned to conceal our words and thoughts and actions from people who were supposed to love us purely for our own safety. We found out that our parents were, in many respects, no different than the bullies our own age that we loathed.
I don’t believe that those lessons benefited my generation one bit.
And I think now what I thought as a child–there has to be a better way of disciplining or punishing a child than hitting them.
If you can train a dog without violence, you can raise a kid without violence.
If you can’t train a dog without violence, you shouldn’t have kids.
Obviously violently beating your child and hurting them is fucked up but tbh a light smack on the hand can be a good way to get your point across when kids dont listen
It is wholly unneeded and ineffective. Do not hit your kids. Even ~only a little~
You know what else is a good way to get your point across?
TALKING TO YOUR KID LIKE A FUCKING PERSON
Discipline and abuse are two sides of a very fine line.
When I was a young child and did something stupid, I was either spanked with a belt or had the SHIT slapped out of the back of my hand. Each time, it was done only once, MAYBE twice if I fucked up particularly bad like cursing at my parents, disrespecting my grandmother/grandfather or other shit I vaguely remember doing. I’m 22 years old now and looking back, I sincerely have to thank my parents. Yes I was talked to, I was told the rules and the consequences, and when I broke them -anyway-, I got punished. It got the point across REAL quick, and I never did it again.
I know that it was NEVER done out of malice or some sadistic desire to hurt a kid, it was done to teach me a lesson so I would grow up and actually be respectful.
I’m not going to ever condone the extent of what happened to the person in the big post above me, and I agree that some people don’t even need that kind of discipline, but some kids need a slap when rules are repeatedly broken.
No child NEEDS to be slapped. Especially with a fucking belt.
A light swat on the bottom doesnt hurt. I had to swat my moms friends toddler lightly on the hand because an (at the time) one year old doesnt understand they can get cut by a knife if they grab your food randomly. I had told her no three times and she still reached for my steak. A two year old wont understand shouting if they dart into the street. They dont know yet that cars are dangerous. You have to either harness them or yank them back by the arm. A three year old might still not be mature enough to realize the stove is hot, especially if they were always kept out of the kitchen. In that instance, getting burned is enough. A four year old might think jumping off the swings is cool. Theyll never do it again if they twist their ankle. Theres many, many ways pain can teach children a lesson, from a swat on the hand to an injury sustained from stupidity. Sometimes pain is the best teacher.
A “light swat on the bottom” CAN hurt. And the idea that children are better off if their parents cause them pain is, frankly, fucked up.
Experts at the University of Michigan and University of Texas looked at decades of research from 75 studies involving more than 160,000 children.
“We found that spanking was associated with unintended detrimental outcomes and was not associated with more immediate or long-term compliance, which are parents’ intended outcomes when they discipline their children.”
Now a new study looking at 400,000 youths from 88 countries around the world suggests such bans are making a difference in reducing youth violence.
“We found [spanking] linked to more aggression, more delinquent behavior, more mental health problems, worse relationships with parents, and putting the children at higher risk for physical abuse from their parents.”
For years, the American Academy of Pediatrics has been warning against spanking, and many countries have laws against it. A 2007 UN convention has said corporal punishment violates the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which protects children from “all forms of physical or mental violence,” and should be banned in all contexts. Psychologist Alan Kazdin, the director of the Yale Parenting Center and former president of the American Psychological Association, has admonished that spanking is “a horrible thing that does not work.” It predicts later academic and health problems: Adults who were spanked as children “regularly die at a younger age of cancer, heart disease, and respiratory illnesses.”
Did you even read my response?
Which part do you think I neglected to address?
Because my argument is that spanking kids DOES hurt them. It has long term impacts.
And honestly, if the only way you think you can teach your child to avoid getting hurt is by deliberately hurting them? That’s bad parenting.
In example one, i had told the child three separate times that she WILL get cut if she grabs for my food at the wrong time. One year olds dont understand that. In example two, the kid isnt getting hurt, but being prevented. In three and four, the kid hurts themselves being dumb. Learn to read.
You want to hit a 12 month old? A 12 month old who definately doesn’t understand why mommy hit them? A fucking baby??
Like, if a kid is old enough to understand when you talk to them- you need to learn how to talk to them. T hen you don’t have to hit them.
If a kid ISNT old enough to understand when you talk to them, no matter how you do so, then they won’t understand why you are intentionally hurting them.
And again, hitting kids causes long lasting psycological damage.
Don’t fucking do it.
First, her mom agreed with my actions. If she doesnt understand words, should i just let her go to the fucking hospital?
Second, even if a kid doesnt understand why you say x is dangerous, they WILL understand if you scare them a tad. She doesnt reach for food if youre cutting it with a knife now. Hows that for “traumatized”?
Or you could just, like, not eat with a steak knife within arms reach of A BABY. You could just remove the danger instead of HITTING a baby.
Experts at the University of Michigan and University of Texas looked at decades of research from 75 studies involving more than 160,000 children.
“We found that spanking was associated with unintended detrimental outcomes and was not associated with more immediate or long-term compliance, which are parents’ intended outcomes when they discipline their children.”
Now a new study looking at 400,000 youths from 88 countries around the world suggests such bans are making a difference in reducing youth violence.
“We found [spanking] linked to more aggression, more delinquent behavior, more mental health problems, worse relationships with parents, and putting the children at higher risk for physical abuse from their parents.”
For years, the American Academy of Pediatrics has been warning against spanking, and many countries have laws against it. A 2007 UN convention has said corporal punishment violates the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which protects children from “all forms of physical or mental violence,” and should be banned in all contexts. Psychologist Alan Kazdin, the director of the Yale Parenting Center and former president of the American Psychological Association, has admonished that spanking is “a horrible thing that does not work.” It predicts later academic and health problems: Adults who were spanked as children “regularly die at a younger age of cancer, heart disease, and respiratory illnesses.”
So how would i have eaten the only thing i had for a meal without one? The only thing i could cook quickly that had real substance? Really you need to think. It isnt always possible to not need a steak knife with a baby around. So we are all supposed to cut up our food before serving it like little kids? Ugh.
Uh, yes?
Or move like…1 foot further away? It’s a baby. They don’t have elastic arms.
Don’t hit a baby.
How do you expect that to work with larger families? No one wants cold food. And did you not read the part where she DOESNT FUCKING REACH FOR FOOD ANYMORE WHEN WE HAVE KNIVES? I was getting ready for work that day. They happened to be visiting. How is it so horrible that i kept a baby from needing stitches while not inconveniencing myself or anyone else?
Because you hit a fucking baby.
Instead of moving 1 foot further away, or cutting your food up before moving to the table, or making a meal that didn’t involve needing a steak knife, or literally anything else you could have done to not have a steak knife within arms reach of A BABY.
You decided the easiest solution to “the baby is too close to that knife” was to HIT THE BABY.
Seeing all these people trying to defend and being ok with hitting kids:
Eh, while it’s great that these characters are independent, something about all these princesses of color not finding love at the end of their movies rubs me the wrong way. Just like how Disney patted itself on the back for a black princess but she was Frogger damn near the whole movie.
And it would’ve been a great opportunity to cast moc in romantic roles from that culture
^^^ I’m so conflicted because yes, always having a love interest is annoying but poc never get to have a love interest
Having the princesses of color not find love reinforces the idea that we have to strong and independent and aren’t needing of any support
But I do like it because it deviates from the norm
It might be cool if they had dudes in the movie who were interested and they had the princesses be like, “naw, I got shit to do, but maybe later!”
Cause then it would obviously be a choice, instead of a worldstate that WoC don’t get hetero love (I’m not even gonna wish for queer love).
This is actually a good example of the need for intersectional feminism.
it is very common that white girl characters have love interests and finding love be the plot line and basis for all their stories and interactions.
It is uncommon for a girl character of color to be seen as a potential love interest, in need of defense by a male character and/or support from a male character full stop.
This is because of the history of social devaluation of woc and infantilization of white women.
Thusly:
it is subversive for white female characters to not have love interests for once and to focus on strength outside of male attention.
while at the same time
is it subversive for woc to be love interests and treated with care and reverence and with support in relationships on screen.
The “norms” for two groups of women are different based on the historical interaction both groups have had to suffer under patriarchal and sexist/racist media.
This is why its okay to feel hurt and roll your eyes when you see people screaming about how michonne from the walking dead “dont need no man” because she’s too “strong” to want to be desired and cared for, while at the same time feel hurt and roll your eyes when Black Widow is suddenly too helpless to get herself free from a basic ass cage and needs to be rescued by her randomly inserted love interest.
This is low key racist. Because they gave us decades of white girls falling in love until everyone got sick of it. And when they started creating princesses of color suddenly none of them want love? I guess it’s so easy now to create ‘independent’ princesses because they don’t think women of color deserve love anyway. Why not appease the white girls while reinforcing this stereotype, kill two birds with one stone!
Not because he’s particularly outlandish, but because he doesn’t look the way he does in pictures. Sure, they don’t expect for him to always be jumping through the air with a civilian tucked under his arm, but somehow, when transitioning from the No. 1 Pro Hero to an objective medium, he becomes shockingly normal. The mixture of freckles and green hair and All Might jacket make him blend in with the crowd and appear surprisingly plain, despite the unsettlingly bright smile and height.
When people meet Deku, they’re surprised.
Not because they didn’t think he had his own interests outside of the hero business, but because he’s truly a fanboy at heart and they weren’t expecting that out of the hero who has it all. He’ll show up at a convention and ask to take photos with cosplayers, as if he isn’t the most cosplayed hero in the vicinity. He won’t be bothered by the camera in his face as he picks his way through merchandise and he’ll look hilariously calm when he asks the reporter if they have change for a twenty.
When people meet Deku, they’re surprised.
Not because he’s intimidating, but because he’s the complete opposite. He’s big and has a handshake that somehow reinforces that he’s used to shaking the hands of equally powerful people, but he’s clumsy and laughs at his own mistakes and gets flustered when a fan asks for an autograph. He’ll engage a fan in a conversation about Ingenium when he sees their t-shirt and he’ll begin to ramble about his friends and he’ll almost exchange numbers with them before realizing that it would be a breach of his personal security, but that doesn’t stop him from giving them his username on a forum site.
When people meet Deku, they’re surprised.
Not because he’s not what they expected, but because he’s everything they could have ever hoped for in a hero, while simultaneously surprising them with every step he takes.
Stressed, Depressed, and Story Obsessed 
