…and doesn’t want to be.
In the queer community, we can hardly get through a conversation without someone falling back on the old “we’re just like straight people, except… you know, gay” argument; and the same can easily be…
Fantastic piece by newlyemmett, expressing a really important sentiment which I’ve been struggling to articulate for a long while now.
If someone doesn’t “seem” disabled to you, maybe it’s because they’ve been forced to develop a huge and complex system of coping mechanisms in order to try and survive in an ableist world. It’s probably that.
Go home, Shimer College. You are drunk.
so, i have this book.
"How To Attain and Practice The Ideal Sex Life" by Dr. J. Rutgers
first off, this book is hysterical, for many many reasons, but what really surprised me was they had a chapter dedicated to homosexuality
Just as the majority of us feel ourselves sexually attracted to persons of the opposite sex (heterosexuality), so also there are men and women who feel attracted, with equally pure and lofty motives, to members of their own sex (homosexuality).
In this chapter we are not referring to those cases in which persons seek their sexual satisfaction with those of the same sex on purpose as an exceptional experiment, or because there is no member of the opposite sex available. We are now dealing exclusively those persons in whom this individual peculiarity is deeply rooted in their mentality, either inborn, strictly speaking, or as such a direct consequence of influences to which they have been subjected in their early childhood, that it can hardly be distinguished from an inborn tendency. This preference for one’s own sex may indeed be so marked as to be quite exclusive, with a pronounced dislike for the opposite sex. Here it is not a case of “are there such people?”, but “such people do exist.”
like…DUDE you told me earlier in this damn book that if i wanna masturbate i should wait 24 hours to see if the urge passes as it’s such a Wrong and Deviant Thing To Do but this is…surprisingly progressive for a book in the 1940s, if really transphobic, cissexist, biphobic and binaristic…
and then there’s this bit where i’m TRULY floored
We often express pity for homosexuals as if they were hampered in their choice of intimate attachments; but we forget that we heterosexuals are equally hampered. It is just as if right-handed people should pity the left-handed ones; but those people who are as clever with their left hand as with the right, i.e., who are ambidextrous, may claim to occupy a higher place.
Who knows if the time will not also come one day, when the highest class of people will be ambisexual, feeling affection for both sexes alike, according to the agreement and harmony of their characters, and not always considering the difference of sex as the cardinal point. When they will not be in love with the sex , but will feel attracted by personal human sympathy. Only then such highly gifted people would have the right to despise us ordinary heterosexual mortals as they would the homosexuals, on account of our limitations.
excuse me, doctor but did you just actually write the phrase “ordinary heterosexual mortals” and imply that non-monosexualites are enlightened and better than the others i’m HAVING HYSTERICS
but let’s just stop for a moment and appreciate those three words one more time
"ordinary heterosexual mortals"
thank you for your time
On November 11, an extremist anti-Autistic hate group with the ironic name “Autism Speaks” – a well-funded organization with a history of promoting the stigmatization, silencing, disenfranchisement, abuse, murder, and eugenic extermination of people like myself – released a “call
This is so beautiful and perfect that I think you all need to read it right now.
You win this round cheese
actually that is a rectangle cheese
[oxford comma laughing in the distance]
[vocative comma wondering what oxford comma thinks it’s doing here]
I already reblogged this for the pun but I’m reblogging again for the sick punctuation banter
I once told a joke about a straight person.
They came after me in droves.
Each one singing the same:
Don’t fight fire with fire.
What they mean is: Don’t fight fire with anything.
Do not fight fire with water.
Do not fight fire with foam.
Do not evacuate the people.
Do not sound the alarms.
Do not crawl coughing and choking and spluttering to safety.
Do not barricade the door with damp towels.
Do not wave a white flag out of the window.
Do not take the plunge from several stories up.
Do not shed a tear for your lover trapped behind a wall of flame.
Do not curse the combination of fuel, heat, and oxygen.
Do not ask why the fire fighters are not coming.
When they say: Don’t fight fire with fire.
What they mean is: Stand and burn."
The most delicious musical score of 1991 is Alan Menken and Howard Ashman’s “Beauty and the Beast.” If the growing armada of titanically troubled Broadway musicals had half its charm and affectionate cleverness, the ships wouldn’t be foundering.
"Beauty and the Beast" has the best songs of any Disney movie since "Lady and the Tramp" and the best, most sophisticated score since "Sleeping Beauty"—and that was adapted from Tchaikovsky. Menken & Ashman are not revolutionaries—that’s not what Disney is about—but their work is old-fashioned in the most endearing sense….
Because the story is set in France, Menken [and Ashman have] given the music a French flavor, and not just in the Chevalieresque moments of the irrepressible “Be Our Guest.” He is a master of pastiche, and his score shimmers and simmers with Debussy, Saint-Saens, Satie and Couperin; the village girls who ogle Gaston are descendants of a flirtatious trio in Massenet’s “Manon.” But there are nods to great Americans, too, including Copland and Bernstein. The sensational “Belle,” complete with Ashman’s sly and quick-cutting dialogue, is reminiscent of Sondheim.
The orchestration is lush, too, and despite some requisite Hollywood glissandi, often delightful and surprising. There’s some effective use of woodwinds—and when did you last hear a harpsichord in a musical? Throughout, Ashman’s lyrics are just right, intricate or simple, sweet and funny. And even the tinniest ear will respond to a rhyme like “but behind that fair facade/I’m afraid she’s rather odd.” As in all great musicals of the last 50 years, “Beauty and the Beast” has songs that actually advance the plot …
Two quotes to share; the first is from Letter From Birmingham Jail:
I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: ‘I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action’; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a ‘more convenient season.’ Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
Who wants to take bets on which Whites are going to reblog this and remove the quote, as he’s regularly misquoted, made a meme and used by them to silence Black people? :)
I also love this, something James Baldwin wrote about him:
The secret of his greatness does not lie in his voice or his presence or his manner, though it has something to do with all these; nor does it lie in his verbal range or felicity, which are not striking; nor does he have any capacity for those stunning, demagogic flights of the imagination which bring an audience cheering to its feet. The secret lies, I think, in his intimate knowledge of the people he is addressing, be they black or white, and in the forthrightness with which he speaks of those things which hurt and baffle them. He does not offer any easy comfort and this keeps his hearers absolutely tense. He allows them their self-respect—indeed, he insists on it.
Quiet hands. It means to be still and proper. It means to stop flapping or squeezing or flicking or rubbing. It means, in translation, "Stop looking so damn Autistic already!"
It is a quick, easy way to silence Autistic people. Especially Autistic people who don’t talk, for whom behavior is unquestionably communication.
Having quiet hands means giving in to systemic ableism and letting external standards of “normality” and “acceptability” dictate one’s behavior at all times. Having quiet hands means hiding being Autistic and suppressing natural ways of speaking and moving. Having quiet hands means shutting up and putting up and giving up.I don’t want to have quiet hands. Ever.
This photo always cheers me up a bit. It’s a front-page article from 1955 about Christine Jorgensen, one of the first women to have sex-reassignment surgery.
Since the text is a bit small and I couldn’t find a larger copy, here’s what the small blurb says:
A World of a Difference
George W. Jorgensen, Jr., son of a Bronx carpenter, served in the Army for two years and was given honorable discharge in 1946. Now George is no more. After six operations, Jorgensen’s sex has been changed and today she is a striking woman, working as a photographer in Denmark. Parents were informed of the big change in a letter Christine (that’s her new name) sent to them recently.
This article is 58 years old, and it’s more respectful of Christine’s pronoun choices and name than some publications are today. It makes me happy to see a newspaper be respectful of a trans person’s choice of name and pronouns like that :3
Holy crow that’s like… a genuinely admirable article. You… go… 1955…???
Ooh, that’s lovely. The commentary above is interesting, and set me off on an infodump which may seem to veer mostly off-topic…bear with me:
There’s this myth of chronological ethnocentrism—the idea that present-day society is now the most liberal, progressive, and enlightened it has ever been, and that the past was a cesspool of racism, sexism, traditionalism, anti-scientific sentiment, etc. which is comfortably behind us. As this and countless other examples of past society being really phenomenally awesome about contentious contemporary issues demonstrate, CE is a severely flawed notion. By pretending/believing/assuming that we can observe and comment on the past from a moral high ground, it minimizes the things which are properly fucked up about our culture and social norms here-and-now. It assumes that however bad things may be, at least it’s not back then. For instance, I remember my own elementary school Black History Month curriculum presenting racism and discrimination as a problem we’ve solved, progressed beyond, and oh—wasn’t it awful how ignorant this country was back then? Small wonder then, with that sort of overly-simplified foundational instruction going on, that so many privileged white people will scoff, roll their eyes, become defensive, at the preposterous notion that institutional racial biases might (a) exist and (b) be real factors in such incidents as the infamous shooting of Trayvon Martin.
Furthermore, people tend to use chronological ethnocentrism as a catch-all justification and Get Out of Jail Free card for all things which are both problematic and “from the past.” Academics often won’t seriously discuss that which is sexist in Shakespeare or Dostoyevsky, fans won’t hear a negative word against troublesome classic Disney films, or Singin’ In The Rain, or their favorite vintage comics, dismissing the eyebrow-raisers as ‘products of their time,’ above all reproach as they lacked benefit of present-day enlightened liberal thinking. The rationale, sometimes unconscious, sometimes explicit, goes something like: “Without the recent articulate and emphatic feminist movement, how were folk expected to know that women are people with their own right to autonomy and property and suffrage? Before Martin Luther King Jr., how could it occur to any white person that segregation might be vile and abhorrent? “In 1784, five years before he became president of the United States, George Washington was nearly toothless. So he hired a dentist to transplant nine teeth into his jaw—having extracted them from the mouths of his slaves." But, the aforelinked article continues, our esteemed hero of a first president and his fellow slave-owning founding fathers "were hampered by the culture of their time." So go ahead, celebrate President’s Day. Sure, Franklin Roosevelt authorized the horribly unjust internment of tens of thousands of Japanese Americans, but he was otherwise a really great president who made a few mistakes because the times were different then! It’s entirely unfair to call it an act of cowardly xenophobic racism!"
Insisting that ‘the times were different then’ makes it easy to overlook the acts of cowardly xenophobic racism—or any number of other issues, including transphobia—which are ongoing today. Racial profiling: not discriminatory, just common sense. I learned in school that discrimination doesn’t really happen any more, after all.
It is only natural of humans to want to believe the best of ourselves. I obviously don’t mean to attack the person who wrote “You… go… 1955…???” so incredulously. My first reaction to this clipping was surprise too.
But yes. You go 1955! Let’s all ask ourselves why it is that this headline would be met with just as much surprise and delight if it appeared in a newspaper of today.
A brief summary of why I don’t like Severus Snape
since you’ve included the deathly hallows I have to deduct that your argument is invalid
Sorry I forgot that wanting to fuck Lily Potter makes up for being a terrible person!!!
Always gratifying to see corporations take such a brave stance on the tough moral questions. Someone send them a gift basket of baked goods.