Alright, tumblr, I am out… for like, three weeks!
I’m really excited about Guardians of the Galaxy becoming a feature-length movie. It’s like a sign that Marvel is edging into bringing more obscure characters outside of the comic universe.
… I just really, really want Ultimate Fallout movies. (Also, Avengers Arena. Who wouldn’t pay to see that?)
Maybe even a good Young Avenger’s adaptation? Queer babies and all?
I have hope.
Beware, here be possible spoilers.
Chances are, if you follow me, you are the type of person who is fond of/ willing to try appreciating the wonders of Marvel movies.
Please, do yourself a favor, and watch Winter Soldier.I don’t think I’ve ever seen a movie pull off comic-book plot style, characterization, and energy with such pure pathos. It screams everything that Marvel’s been doing right in the past few years; upping kickbutt lady amperage, plat relationships, and, of course,
EXPLOSIONS! *crowd cheers madly*
Set yourself up for glorious violence and bring the tissues, because The Winter Soldier is one HELL of a ride.
Ever since I started playing the game about two months ago I’ve had trouble putting my finger on exactly what I found wrong with the homoeroticism in FE13. I’m not talking about the lack of same-sex S supports, because that’s built into the mechanics of a second generation so it’s grudgingly understandable. Rather, so many of the support conversations (and I’ve not even gotten them all yet) have these uncomfortably handled queer moments - Avatar gets them the most since his/her C-A supports seem to be largely the same regardless of gender, but there are other instances - Sully’s gender nonconformity showing up in almost all of her supports, the infamous Virion/Libra, etc. They all have one thing in common, something that is practically nonexistent in every FE before: they acknowledge the prospect of homoeroticism only to immediately shut it down, usually by playing it off as a joke. I distinctly remember multiple instances of things like “That’s not what I mean” or “I’m not that kind of guy/girl” or just general freaking out over the possibility of a homoerotic situation.
FE homoeroticism is out of the closet, and the results are not pretty.
This very eloquently nails what made me uncomfortable about many of Awakening’s support conversations. Is it truly that difficult to acknowledge queer relationships without making it a joke?
here’s a comic i did about two normal police officers working out their personal differences. i was hecka self conscious about posting this cause it’s rough hahaha but i got talked into it!!!
Which is basically what it is! Except not.
Have you ever wanted to read a story about gentrification and second generation colonialism, but in a prep school setting? In space?(!)
Artist Stromae designs and launches first clothing capsule collection.
After successfully conquering the music world with two commercially successful hit albums, Belgian-Rwandese artist Stromae has been flexing his creative bones some more to create the singer’s very own debut clothing line and collection.
Derived from a rearranging of the his musical moniker (which is itself a play on the word ‘maestro’), MOSAERT is a Belgian creative label spearheaded by the talented singer and composer. Under this label, Stromae has developed his brand’s first capsule collection inspired by English grammar school style, checker and isometric patterns, and African wax colors. The lookbook modelled after typical school portraits and class photographs.
For now, made in Europe (France and Portugal) t-shirt and sock range is only available online, at Colette stores in France and Hunting and Collection in Belgium.
Connect with Dynamic Africa on:
All Africa, All the time.
Are these sculptures of roman citizens or slaves?
The association of Black people with enslavement is an entirely modern invention, as in, chattel slavery in the…
Regarding the whole ‘men hunted, women gave birth’ thing (and wildly off topic from racism in classical Rome, sorry), it is looking increasingly like a load of nonsense (no surprise).
There are prehistoric hunting scenes showing hunts which (probably *1) show women hunting for one thing and despite this male researcers still declares that men hunted and men created these hunting scenes and were also the first artists. But now we know that these hunting scenes not only show women hunting in some cases but WERE PRODUCED BY WOMEN primarily!
So what evidence for male = hunter is there?
When you look at the evidence for male hunters you have gender bias (men obviously hunted because men hunt now), gender essentialism (men hunted because they had less body fat and didn’t need to produce babies and Reasons) and ethnographic evidence (indigenous Australian hunters were solely male in the 19th-20th centuries).
We assume that because violent activities today are associated with men while women nurtured young that has always been the way. We also assume that women who were not pregnant would be compelled to behave in the same way as women who were pregnant/looking after children. It also assumes that hunting was much more dangerous than it probably was, hunters were often as much scavengers as far as we can tell from archaeological evidence of kill sites and often employed tactics like driving pray off cliffs to die or into dead ends were they could be picked off more safely. That isn’t to say it was completely safe of course. But who is to say gathering was necessarily safe in an age where a simple cut could result in death from infection and there were no anti-bodies for the admittedly few venomous creatures in Europe or that the gatherers would be free from the attentions of now extinct predators.
Much of the ethnographic evidence comes either from African nomadic peoples which have still had thousands of years of contact with patriarchal cultures or Australian Aboriginal and Papua New Guinean groups. The ethnographic observations were made in the 19th and 20th centuries and are deeply racist because they were based on the assumption that these cultures were primitive and unchanging since settlement of Sahul (Australia + New Guinea when they were connected) 50,000 years ago! We know, for example, in the early nineteenth century the power structure of Australian indigenous populations shifted in favour of young men after various epidemics killed 90% of the Aboriginal population in the space of 50 years or thereabout (something we never learnt in school, funnily enough). We do not know who hunted prior to European colonisation of Australia. We guess and the further back in time you go the more problematic that becomes because the hundreds at least indigenous cultures in Australia have all evolved over time just like any other culture.
IF we accept the creators of the hunting scenes across Europe were hunters themselves then we have to accept that women were as likely to be hunters as men. If we do not want to accept that the people who made the art were hunters then we have no evidence beyond ethnographic evidence for males solely being hunters and then we have to look carefully at the ethnographic evidence and accept it is deeply, deeply problematic.
So, in my opinion as a humble archaeology undergraduate, we either accept we have no firm evidence to say men or women hunted, just that hunting was done. If you accepted the cave paintings as evidence of male hunters when they were believed to be produced by men you should also accept they are now evidence of female hunting.
If you think you can say with certainty that ‘women have always been subjected to men because Reasons’ then you have no clue what you are talking about.Sadly much of the scholarship on the subject assumes male = hunter and works forward from that, trying to justify the assumption rather than addressing the actual evidence. Because if we accept that there is no evidence for that then it undermines a lot of nonsense gender essentialism used to handwave away sexism in society today.
Australian Archaeology by Peter Hiscock
Lectures, seminars, lost media articles etc.
*1 Of course it is ‘accepted’ (read: assumed) that all the figures are male by default unless there are obvious feminine traits as opposed to just representing people in general.
Oh my god, I could not have said that nearly as well as you did.
This is such a concise and accessible explanation of why and how so much of what we “know” about the ancient world, prehistory, and a lot of history in general has almost EVERYTHING to do with looking for confirmation of reflections of our CURRENT SOCIETY, and any academic with a lick of honesty will tell you the same thing.
This is a goddamn fascinating discussion.
A man in the grocery store line today approached me and said, “Sir, when I first saw you I was extremely attracted to you, but then I noticed that you are a boy. How… I mean, why do you dress so provocatively?”
I responded, “Well, in today’s world the majority of the straight male race view women as objects, or something that belongs to them. I dress provocatively because it attracts the attention of men in a sexual and OBJECTIVE way. However, when realized that I am actually male, they often become confused, disgusted, upset or all of the above. By inflicting this minor emotional damaged upon the ego of a man raised by twisted societal gender norms, maybe, just maybe the individual will think twice before viewing another woman with an objective attitude and sense of belonging. No woman, belongs to ANYONE. Male or female, the equality of human beings needs to be a priority. It is something worth dressing up for.”
I AM NOT KIDDING. The woman behind me, the female cashier, the old lady bagging groceries and the woman in front of me who was talking on the phone STOPPED, …. and proceeded to gasp and clap. The man shook my hand, told me to have a blessed day and then said, “excuse me ladies, I need to visit my daughter.”
…. I was shaking by the time I walked out of the store.
- Elliott Alexzander