It happened one summer that a curse fell on my family. The details aren’t important. We could be here all night with who married whom and who cursed what. There was a curse, that’s all you need to know.
All seven of my brothers were turned into swans. From loud, hard-handed…
There are a lot of abuse and recovery stories out there in fandom. A lot of them are written by people who’ve never been in an abusive relationship. That’s fine, that certainly doesn’t mean you can’t write it, especially when it’s present in canon. Unfortunately, it does…
Do you ever think you'll stop drawing fanart? No offense it just seems like the kind of thing you're supposed to grow out of. I'm just curious what your plans/goals are since it isn't exactly an art form that people take seriously.
Ah, fanart. Also known as the art that girls make.
Sad, immature girls no one takes seriously. Girls who are taught that it’s shameful to be excited or passionate about anything, that it’s pathetic to gush about what attracts them, that it’s wrong to be a geek, that they should feel embarrassed about having a crush, that they’re not allowed to gaze or stare or wish or desire. Girls who need to grow out of it.
That’s the art you mean, right?
Because in my experience, when grown men make it, nobody calls it fanart. They just call it art. And everyone takes it very seriously.
When you look at what constitutes ‘female privilege’ in the eyes of MRAs and MRAs-in-training, you see exactly how ignorant most of them are to real discrimination and fear. In the MRA handbook, female privilege is being able to speak to men without being considered predatory; it’s being able to decide whether or not to continue with a pregnancy (as opposed to having a child forced on you so that a scheming bitch can rob you blind for the next 18 years); it’s being able to have sex with a man and then later change your mind while accusing him of rape; it’s having the right to leave a marriage because the courts will favour you in a custody dispute; it’s receiving the ‘coveted status’ of being a rape survivor on a college campus and all the advantages that come with that.
With the exception of that last one, which is so despicably offensive that it’s almost impossible to believe it was not only printed in the Washington Post but that it was written by a Pulitzer prize-winning journalist, all of these examples of ‘female privilege’ seem less indicative of a rising gynarchy poised to crush whimpering men with a gigantic, comfortably shod foot than they do just basic rights that women are entitled to have even though they prevent men from being able to behave exactly as they like.
Women don’t come to life the moment men approach us, and asking that men respect our space and not assume their presence is always or even ever welcome isn’t the equivalent of Stonewall. Similarly, until science can figure out how to make Ivan Reitman’s terrifying vision of the dystopian universe presented in seminal 90s movie ‘Junior’ a reality, it is not ‘female privilege’ for a woman to have the final say over whether or not she grows a fetus inside her for nine months before birthing it and then raising it. And while we’re at it, can we all agree that it’s a curious bit of cognitive dissonance to argue about paying for children you don’t want in one breath while ranting about how the legal system won’t give them to you in the other?
The idea that the fight for gender equality has swung ‘too far’ to the other side is simply ludicrous. One woman is still killed every week in Australia by her partner or ex-partner. The WHO estimates that 30 per cent of women worldwide who have been in a sexual relationship have experienced some form of violence within that partnership. The two issues most integral to that of women’s equality - that of reproductive autonomy and financial independence - are still not considered legally sacrosanct for the overwhelming majority of women in the world today.
And we’ve got men (and some women) complaining that feminism is subjugating men?
I’ll let you in on a little secret. The Feminist Mafia is trying to erode men’s rights, and we’ve had some success over the years. Like the right for a man to legally rape his wife. Destroyed that. Or the right of men to determine who rises to political leadership. We nailed that one too. Or how about the right that said women became the physical property of their husbands, husbands who then had the right to commit these women to mental asylums (and frequently did) as a means of securing a divorce, leaving him free to marry another (often younger) woman? Yep, got rid of that.
Peggy Orenstein’s 1994 text ‘Schoolgirls’ included an anecdote which observed that, for many men and boys, equality is perceived as a loss. And it technically is, because any time a disparate system of power is equalised, one side must surrender some privileges. Referring to ‘female privilege’ (particularly in a world where, in some places, it is considered a privilege that girls even be allowed to live) as some kind of nefarious threat to the psychic wellbeing of men isn’t just offensive, it’s also dangerous. It provides a focal point of blame for the frustrations of men who feel they’ve somehow been denied all that was promised to them, and it can have terrifying and often violent ramifications for the women in their lives.
Yo, could you or any of your followers explain the difference between sexual and romantic attraction? I think the handful of crushes I've had in my life involved both, but maybe it was just romantic attraction? I'm just rather confused by the whole thing.
Ah yes, it can be quite confusing, especially since they sometimes occur at the same time. Here are some traits of each which help me figure it out.
desire to hold hands, snuggle, or be “lovey-dovey”
desire for romantic partnership
physically feels like “butterflies” in stomach
Disney stereotypes are exaggerated but somewhat accurate
desire to develop emotional intimacy
desire to see person be happy, do things to make them happy
desire for exclusivity; feelings of jealousy
can be rather irrational and/or obsessive
very visceral, physical feeling of heat or “melted honey”
feeling might manifest in stomach, genitals, etc.
thoughts/fantasies of you & person in sexual situations
desire to touch person sexually or have them touch you
physical, magnetic pull towards person
like sensual attraction on fire, with sense of urgency
feels just like hunger for that person
feels kind of primal/animalistic
The problem is that a lot of these describe strong attraction; the stronger an attraction is, the easier it is to identify, I think (which is probably why most allosexuals don’t often doubt their allosexuality—they feel sexual attraction strongly enough that it never comes into question.) Mild attractions are difficult to spot, but there’s a certain threshold where I think it’s negligible—if you can’t actually see yourself acting on it, or the thought of acting on it repulses you at all, you’re probably more ace than not. Hope that helps, and feel free to ask for clarification.
Note: Experiencing the above things does not mean you are attracted to someone; some of the romantic attraction things also apply to close platonic relationships.
“Women invented all the core technologies that made civilization possible. This isn’t some feminist myth; it’s what modern anthropologists believe. Women are thought to have invented pottery, basketmaking, weaving, textiles, horticulture, and agriculture. That’s right: without women’s inventions, we wouldn’t be able to carry things or store things or tie things up or go fishing or hunt with nets or haft a blade or wear clothes or grow our food or live in permanent settlements. Suck on that.
Women have continued to be involved in the creation and advancement of civilization throughout history, whether you know it or not. Pick anything—a technology, a science, an art form, a school of thought—and start digging into the background. You’ll find women there, I guarantee, making critical contributions and often inventing the damn shit in the first place.
Women have made those contributions in spite of astonishing hurdles. Hurdles like not being allowed to go to school. Hurdles like not being allowed to work in an office with men, or join a professional society, or walk on the street, or own property. Example: look up Lise Meitner some time. When she was born in 1878 it was illegal in Austria for girls to attend school past the age of 13. Once the laws finally eased up and she could go to university, she wasn’t allowed to study with the men. Then she got a research post but wasn’t allowed to use the lab on account of girl cooties. Her whole life was like this, but she still managed to discover nuclear fucking fission. Then the Nobel committee gave the prize to her junior male colleague and ignored her existence completely.
Men in all patriarchal civilizations, including ours, have worked to downplay or deny women’s creative contributions. That’s because patriarchy is founded on the belief that women are breeding stock and men are the only people who can think. The easiest way for men to erase women’s contributions is to simply ignore that they happened. Because when you ignore something, it gets forgotten. People in the next generation don’t hear about it, and so they grow up thinking that no women have ever done anything. And then when women in their generation do stuff, they think ‘it’s a fluke, never happened before in the history of the world, ignore it.’ And so they ignore it, and it gets forgotten. And on and on and on. The New York Times article is a perfect illustration of this principle in action.
Finally, and this is important: even those women who weren’t inventors and intellectuals, even those women who really did spend all their lives doing stereotypical “women’s work”—they also built this world. The mundane labor of life is what makes everything else possible. Before you can have scientists and engineers and artists, you have to have a whole bunch of people (and it’s usually women) to hold down the basics: to grow and harvest and cook the food, to provide clothes and shelter, to fetch the firewood and the water, to nurture and nurse, to tend and teach. Every single scrap of civilized inventing and dreaming and thinking rides on top of that foundation. Never forget that.”—
Violet Socks, Patriarchy in Action: The New York Times Rewrites History (via o1sv)
Reblogging again for that paragraph because that is the part we forget the most.
a while back, ghostbong bought a very cheap, very used Roomba from craigslist. ”so, you’re going to ‘hack’ this, right?” said the man at the parking lot rendezvous. but we just wanted a vacuum. since then, the addition of the word “robot” to our casual, every-day lexicon is…
“We think of men as antiheroes, as capable of occupying an intense and fascinating moral grey area; of being able to fall, and rise, and fall again, but still be worthy of love on some fundamental level, because if it was the world and its failings that broke them, then we surely must owe them some sympathy. But women aren’t allowed to be broken by the world; or if we are, it’s the breaking that makes us villains. Wronged women turn into avenging furies, inhuman and monstrous: once we cross to the dark side, we become adversaries to be defeated, not lost souls in need of mending. Which is what happens, when you let benevolent sexism invest you in the idea that women are humanity’s moral guardians and men its native renegades: because if female goodness is only ever an inherent quality – something we’re born both with and to be – then once lost, it must necessarily be lost forever, a severed limb we can’t regrow. Whereas male goodness, by virtue of being an acquired quality – something bestowed through the kindness of women, earned through right action or learned through struggle – can just as necessarily be gained and lost multiple times without being tarnished, like a jewel we might pawn in hardship, and later reclaim.”—
okay I am reblogging this TWICE because I actually read the whole thing this time (it’s great, go read it) and this is my reaction to that.
I’m kinda shocked/angry that people think Sarah is an unlikeable protagonist. I remember a moment of being startled in the first episode that she was totally a criminal, because I wasn’t expecting the show to really go there, protagonists are usually conventionally moral people, but I got with the program real fast, and honestly, Sarah is the character I identify with most on that show. I get angry and defensive when people call Cosima “the smart clone” because while Cosima is fantastic and definitely smart (and why does there have to be only one smart clone anyway, why does this have to be measured and compared) Sarah’s “street smarts” (read: poor smarts) are less valued, considered less intellectual, when she is a goddamn genius who thinks so FAST on her feet and pulls off such amazing, thinking-outside-the-box solutions to hard problems with steep consequences. I’m continually impressed at her resourcefulness, intelligence, and bravery.
And honestly. Honestly. I feel like if there are problems people have with Sarah, it’s at the intersection of both misogyny and classism.
Because when you’re on the bottom like that, you don’t have the same opportunities. Education? It’s a pile of false promises. You have to sacrifice everything to get there, and you end up with a pile of debt and no job, and you see this happen to people around you and you’re told you just have to ~try hard~ and you’ll be the one that makes it but you know it’s a lie, it’s a carrot on a stick. You know the people who put you in this miserable hole to die aren’t going to forgive you and give you a better life if you placate them, as tempting as that lie can seem. And when survival is what’s on the line, you start making riskier choices. You develop a tolerance for risk—that’s what Sarah has, a high tolerance for risk, because she’s been forced to live in a state of constant risk. And that’s dangerous too, and there are consequences, but you see that everything else is a dead end, and you’re just trying to get ahead just enough, you think, just a little bit more and I’ll have enough money to quit. Or you get scared off by the risk and try to go straight but then your situation gets worse and you need to break some rules to save your damn self, because you don’t see the point in just sitting there like a chump and dying or having your life ruined when you have the ability to get away with it (this time).
And the issue of her absentee motherhood…well, that just kind of hit me in the heart, because if you’ve lived in a poor neighborhood, you know moms who have lost custody of their kids, to the state or to other relatives. You’ve seen this all before…the pain, the longing, the constant hope, the constant striving. Moms saying they just need to earn enough money to get a bigger apartment because the state says the kid needs their own bedroom, working away at that hamster wheel job that will never pay them enough for that apartment but they can’t get anything better. The look in a mother’s eyes when the father of the kids brings the kids over for visitation, and they’re growing up so fast. The despair when a woman tells you she thinks her mother is abusing her child the way she was abused as a kid. When I see a mother who’s lost custody of her child and is trying to get it back, unless given reason to believe otherwise, I don’t think she’s a bad mother. Because I’ve seen so many good mothers in this situation, whose children were deprived of their love, because of racism, and classism, and sexism (when the father takes custody, usually just to be possessive and claim something he knows she loves and control her) and god knows what else. And I see pain and love there. So seeing Sarah’s love for Kira, I immediately saw the narrative of a poor woman, hurt the way poor women are hurt. And Sarah, she’s such a lioness, a mother bear, she’s so fierce and protective and the BEST at surviving and I just wanna see her go all lone wolf and cub. ;A;
Really the only criticism I’d have of Sarah is BE NICER TO YOUR SESTRAAAA because I can see how starved Helena is for kindness, and like even if she only did it to be manipulative it would WORK so well and it would become real, c’mon Sarah you must see that, but that’s also my shipping goggles being welded on. u____u
I apologize if you've explained this before but what does MOGII stand for? I've never heard of that acronym for the non cishet community. I'm only familiar with LGBTQIAP+ and GSRM
There’s a little backstory here. Take a seat, grab a cup of coffee.
LGBT(QIAP)+, as you probably realize, is long, unwieldy, and often leaves marginalized peoples out. It also tends to fetishize the L, prioritize the G, criticize the B and forget the T+.
An alternative, GS(R)M was proposed. Proposed in 1966, it stood for Gender, Sexuality (and Romantic) Minorities, and it seemed like a great fit! Until people learned that it was coined by a pedophile, who also wanted to include cishet kinksters, pedophiles, and even rapists in the acronym, as well as other criticisms of the acronym itself. So that was obviously out of the question.
Then MOGII came along, but that one had some evolution. The original term was MOGA, for “Marginalized Orientation and Gender Alignments”. That was cool, but then people began to use MOGAI to include intersex folks who are often left out of important discussions (MOGA… and Intersex). Then it was pointed out that the “A” was somewhat unnecessary and allowed shitty allies a way to weasel themselves in. So, MOGII was born. MOGII stands for Marginalized Orientations, Gender Identity, and Intersex. It’s an excellent catch-all, uses no reclaimed slurs, and makes it entirely about the minorities.
protip if a nerd dude tries to give you a pop quiz about the fandom on your shirt/bag/cosplay by asking you to answer a banal and obscure trivia question to prove you’re a Real Gamer, turn the question back on him. ask him about the thematic implications that bit of trivia has…