#this is emphatically not political lesbianism

[genderkoolaid]

i think i've said this before but i find it very amusing how since making this blog i have become even more engaged in feminism, interested in my own identity as a (multigender) woman, and more critical of casual misogyny. running this blog has even more deeply entrenched my human love for women and my understanding of misogyny is as massive force of oppression or that feminism needs to be more revolutionary and unsettling. caring about trans men has helped me care more about everyone.

#m. #i say ''human love'' bc i wanna be clear i mean love AROMANTICALLY!!!!!!!!! #i do desire women carnally but im talking abt like. appreciation for your fellow living being type shit #this is emphatically not political lesbianism

[y-rhywbeth2]

Lore: Common Phrases and Words #2

Accuracy Disclaimer & The Other Stuff [tldr: D&D lore is a giant conflicting mess. Larian's lore is also a conflicting mess. You learn to take what you want and leave the rest]

Abeir-Toril Why it's called the "Forgotten" Realms History | Time & Festivals | Lexicon [1] [2]| Languages | Living in Faerûn [1] [?] | Notable Organisations | Magic | Baldurs Gate | Waterdeep | The Underdark | Geography and Human Cultures --- WIP

Some more random assorted Common vocabulary and phrases - including some LGBT+ terminology and yet more swearing.

An interesting note about insults in the Realms is that you're encouraged to be creative about them. Performers in particular, like playwrights and minstrels, keep a cycle of new and creative phrases coming and going among the population (Earth has social media for its memes, on Toril you can blame the bards).

'tis and 'twas are not uncommonly heard peppered into speech now and then, though the everyday variants we use are just as common.

Badauler - Nonsense, Hogwash

To be "Right darlburl" / "Proper darlburl" - Pissed off

"The thrust of it" - "the gist of it"

Galad! - Wow!

Anyhail - Anyway

Mayhap - Perhaps "Perhaps" is used only in appropriate social settings as fancy etiquette, and only by the upper class and those who wish to affect such mannerisms (bards and the upper middle-class).

Casking - Vandalism (Sword Coast dialect)

a Nightblood - A thief

"The blood of the night" - Thieving, a phrase used by professionals in the trade.

a Sharpjaw - Juvenile delinquent

a Thruster - An aggressively ambitious social climber (not necessarily derogatory)

Brightbird/s - Lover/s

a Rose [Waterdhavian dialect] - Somebody you're in love with, anyone from a crush to a soulmate a Rose [outside of Waterdeep] - A Submissive [BDSM].

a Fancyman/Fancylad/Fancylass - A partner whom the speaker disapproves of. (So, like, your boyfriend knocks on the door and your mother, who hates him, answers, she'll inform you that your "fancylad" is around again.

Power - Divine magic

a Tavernmaster - Barkeeper

a Clevershanks - Know-it-all (usually used for men) a Clevertongue - Know-it-all (usually used for women)

a Highborn - Noble (polite) a Highnose - Noble (rude), also means "has a stick-up-their-ass"

a Holy-nose - Priest; mildly rude, but more rough than offensive.

a Thruss - Lesbian a Liyan - Gay man (elvish loanword) a Praed - Gay man (gnomish loanword)

a Dathna - Twink

a Harnor - Butch

a Tasmar - Bisexual (masc.) a Shaeda - Bisexual (fem.) (elven loanword)

a "No-thorn" - Asexual

a One - An agender term, similar to using they/them.

Sildur - Trans I didn't see much extrapolation on this one, so I assume it's an adjective: a sildur woman, a sildur man, a sildur one or just "I'm sildur" when providing your gender, I guess.

a Brightcoin - Nouveau Riche. Somebody rising through the social ranks.

a Highmantle - Old Money, or somebody with the etiquette and bearing of one

a Turncoin, Coin lass, Coin lad - Sex worker. Something of a generic term, but also refers more specifically to those unaffiliated with brothels and festhalls.

a Laughing-lad/lass, Highcoin lass/lad - A more affluent sex-worker

a Brightspear, Highcoin Lady/Lord - Sex workers who play the part of the noble and draw clients from that crowd.

"Sark!" - The impolite way to say "gods fucking damn it!" (in contrast to haularake - the polite way to say it)

"Bind me and tar me" - An oath of astonishment, milder but similar in form to "well, fuck me." "Bind me" - short version

"Dark!" - "Damn it!"

"Straek" - "Go drown yourself, right now and painfully." No, really, that's the translation given.

"To stlarn up" - to screw up "Stlarning it up" - Screwing up "Stlarn" - a mild "damn" "Stlarning [thing]" - "Bloody [thing]"

"Tluin" - an emphatic "fuck off"

"Those of all the Nine Hells take you!” - the full version of "Hells"

"Happy Dancing Hobgoblins" - a curse used by the old fashioned and parents trying too hard not to swear in front of infants, rather like that old lady I once met on a train who unironically used "jiminy cricket." Hobgoblins are noted to be unimpressed by this particular phrase.

#the worst typos are the ones that happen to typo into legitimate words so that spellcheck doesn't tell you about them

[abluescarfonwaston]

Toddler Franziska and her little brother Miles who is learning German in tandem with her so he very often picks up her way of saying things since she's a little chatterbox and his main conversation partner. This leading to a German equivalent of Miles very politely requesting 'lesbians' for dinner. Franziska holding his hand and Emphatically agreeing I want Lesbians!!!

Manfred just wheezing. What that's not- i don't know what you're asking for.

LESBIANS! Franziska stomping her little foot. I want Lesbians!!!

No i heard you that word just doesn't mean what you think it does.

Miles in English now: Lasagna? She wants lasagna?

Manfred: OH. It's pronounced [lasagna]

#obviously i don't know enough german to put in a real example #but i think this happens All the time #Miles Edgeworth #franziska von karma #theyre translators for each other #i dont know that word Franziska #(explains it) #Oh so its [word] ill remember that #Manfred hearing them both say something in baby talk: ... i should hire him a tutor

[rotationalsymmetry]

I feel like there's some fundamental understanding of "oppression" and "liberation" that is different from how it normally gets talked about -- I don't even know what to call that, identity politics maybe? -- and which I've never seen or heard spelled out but have seen hinted at or referenced in multiple places.

Let's talk about queer people. I've read Stone Butch Blues, I get how that experience is fundamentally about oppression and how it connects to class-based oppression and how it can connect to race-based oppression within a developed/global north/whatever nation, and how it can connect to colonialist oppression.

But that's not the experience of every person who is gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, ace/aro, intersex, etc. A lot of us emphatically have never experienced anything like that. And one way of understanding the distinction is thinking about what will happen if you have an interaction with a cop or get arrested; are you at significant risk of getting murdered, of getting framed for a crime you didn't actually commit, of the cop doing something blatantly illegal to you with every expectation of getting away with it? Can they fuck up your life without them doing anything against the law? And I'm not trying to minimize things like "your family stop supporting you once they find out", but 1. that's not a universal queer experience, thank goodness, and 2. that's not an exclusively queer experience, a lot of people in demographic groups that are not generally considered oppressed have also had that experience. There are straight men who have been cut off for things outside their control.

There's got to be some other way of understanding things that has less to do with "queer people are oppressed and this is how you tell if someone is queer" and more about "these experiences are experiences of oppression and people who have these experiences have things in common."

If it just says this in the Communist Manifesto or something I'm going to be very embarrassed.

[vergess]

SO some week in september i am going to a gay/lesbian bar (idk which we havent picked a place yet) for the First Time and i have! Questions! 1 is it weird if you go to a bar and don't drink alcohol 2. what the fuck do i wear 3. what do i say if a cute girl talks to me 4. how do i talk to a cute girl 5. what do i wear in a way that will make it obvious i am queer at the queer bar 6. is showing bra strap sexy or trashy bc i hate strapless bras i am going shopping for clothes tonight at New Mall

1) No it's very normal to not drink alcohol at the bar. If you let the bartender know you're not drinking alcohol, you may even get a designated driver discount on your sodas and juices. Some places will also et you get a stamp or paper bracelet so that waitstaff know not to offer you alcoholic drinks if you're going to one of those classy places with the booths and shit.

2) Comfort > Style. You want to wear whatever clothes make you feel like your best self. Your favourites. Whether this is jeans and a buttonup or a skirt and blouse, or a t shirt and board shorts, or whatever else. This is not a high end restaurant or an exclusive club. You do not need to maintain a "look" to enter or fit in to the space. Dress for yourself, not for the bar.

3) I would recommend saying, "Hi, I am [AWKA], nice to meet you."

4) and then following up with some gentle questions about safe subjects such as but not limited to:

Pets: If you could have any pet, what would it be?

Local weather: Yes, really, because you know you both have it in common.

Hobbies: I'm a total [social media addict/gamer girl/whatever], how about you?

Pop culture/art: Ask what movies, books, or music she has been listening to lately.

Current events: What's the best thing that has happened to you in the last week/month?

Her clothes/hair/accessories: If anything she's wearing looks cool, compliment her on it and ask where she got them.

Those are some examples of safe, reasonable opening subjects if someone comes up to talk to you but conversation isn't flowing well.

Topics to ABSOLUTELY AVOID 100%: politics, finances, economics, her work/career (you can talk about your own).

5) Remember in point 2 when I was like 'dress for yourself not the bar'? I assure you, it's a queer bar. People will know you are queer. Because you are at the queer bar. This is what the queer bar is for. Is some wayward cishet wanders in and gets hit on by an disliked gender that's 100000% on them. Alternatively, anything with a rainbow on it. Anything.

6) Tragically, depends on the outfit, but usually sexy. You have to fuck up pretty bad for it to come off "trashy" instead of "I am a smoking hot but readily accessible member of the working class."

When in doubt, you can either use a safety pin to pin the bra strap to your shirt's shoulder from the inside so it's not visible, or you can integrate the bra strap into the outfit more openly/purposefully, by attaching a bow, ribbon, brooch, flower, etc to it.

EXCEPT FOR THE PART WHERE I KEEP REDIRECTING YOU TO POINT 2.

You are severely overthinking the queer bar scene. I think you may be thinking of clubs? Bars really really do not have dress codes, and you emphatically do not need to stress about it. Anything you can wear to the walmart you can wear to the bar, and also anything you can wear to work you can wear to the bar, and also anything you can wear on vacation? You can wear to the bar. There are no limits.

#ask responses

[legisservitaepax]

Article 55 of Family Code

55- A petition for legal separation may be filed on any of the following grounds: (1) Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct directed against the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner; (2) Physical violence or moral pressure to compel the petitioner to change religious or political affiliation; (3) Attempt of respondent to corrupt or induce the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner, to engage in prostitution, or connivance in such corruption or inducement; (4) Final judgment sentencing the respondent to imprisonment of more than six years, even if pardoned; (5) Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of the respondent; (6) Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent; (7) Contracting by the respondent of a subsequent bigamous marriage, whether in the Philippines or abroad; (8) Sexual infidelity or perversion; (9) Attempt by the respondent against the life of the petitioner; or (10) Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year. For purposes of this Article, the term “child” shall include a child by nature or by adoption. (9a)

Francisco vs Tayao

Facts:

Juanaria Francisco, the plaintiff, and Lope Tayao, the defendant, contracted marriage in the City of Manila in 1912. They separated in 1917. The husband then removed to Zamboanga. There he was later prosecuted for having committed adultery with a married woman named Bernardina Medrano, wife of Ambrosio Torres, at whose instance the criminal complaint was instituted. As a result of that proceeding, Lope Tayao, together with his co-accused Bernardina Medrano, was sentenced by the late Judge Ponciano Reyes to suffer three years, six months, and twenty-one days imprisonment prision correccional, and to pay the costs. On these facts, the action of Juanaria Francisco, the plaintiff, against Lope Tayao, the defendant, to have the bonds of matrimony between them dissolved was instituted in the Court of First Instance of Manila and was there denied by Judge of First Instance Revilla. The trial judge based his decision principally on the point that the plaintiff was not an innocent spouse within the meaning of sections 1 and 3 of the Divorce Law. This findings, as well as the dismissal of the complaint, is challenged by the plaintiff on appeal.

Issue

Whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to a decree of divorce in accordance with the Philippine Divorce Law

Ruling:

No. The Philippine Divorce Law, Act No. 2710, is emphatically clear in this respect. Section 1 of the law reads: "A petition for divorce can only be filed for adultery on the part of the wife or concubinage on the part of the husband . . . ." What counsel desires this court to do is to add at hird cause for divorce to the law and to insert two words in section 1 of the Divorce Law so that it will read: "A petition for divorce can only be filed for adultery on the part of the wife or husband or concubinage on the part of the husband." This likewise the court cannot do. It would amount to judicial amendment of the law.

[likea-black-widow-baby]

Marvel Women as things said by the people I am currently living with part 3

Part I / Part II

Natasha: Oh, I see this is a joke at my expense. Yes that makes sense.

Wanda: “When you’re white and you’re a bitch you’re a witch.” “JK Rowling.”

Pepper: When we get back I am going to Staples and getting labels laminated. It’s gonna be beautiful. It’s gonna be ART.

May: I finessed the lock! With a hammer!

Daisy: *Reassuringly* No, I hate God.

Jemma: If your pussy is wet enough that you need a bucket and a mop then you should see a gynecologist.

Bobbi: “Is it wise to electric scooter with a smoothie in my hand? I could drop the smoothie, or myself.” “Well it’s okay if you drop yourself as long as the smoothie is okay.”

Yo-Yo: “Where do I put this?” “Up my butt.” “Up your ass.” “Up your ass.”

Nakia: “I didn’t ask politically, I asked if you’re a furry.” “Well the answer is an emphatic yes.”

Okoye: I could beat a baby in an argument. They can’t even open a door.

Shuri: New Google penis, replacing your old stupid flesh penis. The length of your new penis will be defined by your credit score.

Xialing: Sorry, I’m queer, I can’t say [God’s] name or I combust on the spot.

Katy: Shaking hands in LA is sharing needles.

Kate: “Why do guys have the least sexy names possible?” “I think that’s a sign of lesbianism.”

Yelena: “Is there any way I can convince you to have a snack that is good for your body?” “No.”

Melina: *holding a miniature avocado* I hate this. I want to throw this on the floor.

Maria H: You are the arbiter of cool and sexy.

Monica: If I killed someone it would be fully intentional.

Darcy: I’ve decided toxic masculinity will be my new personality trait.

#Mundie says things #Abby do not interact #marvel women as things said by the people I am currently living with series #black widow #natasha romanoff #wanda maximoff #pepper potts #okoye #nakia #darcy lewis #monica rambeau #maria hill #yelena belova #kate bishop #katy chen #xialing #Shuri #Melina vostakoff #bobbi morse #Melinda May #jemma simmons #daisy johnson #yo yo rodriguez #marvel #agents of shield #hawkeye

[gothhabiba]

Insofar as early 1990s queer theory was in part a bid to bring some of the energy, in-your-face defiance, political urgency, and transgressiveness of on-the ground queer activism into the academy, its early appeal was inseparable from its affective connection to a range of events outside of the academy. [3] If queer offered itself up at this time as a name for a set of theoretical interventions around the relations between sexuality, normativity, and the political, it was because of the current and recent cultural contests it invoked: the genocidal Reagan administrations nonresponse to the AIDS crisis; the associated resurgence of violent homophobia; a newly performative, in-your-face, and media savvy form of activism in groups like ACT UP, the Lesbian Avengers, and Queer Nation; highly publicized battles over the state funding of queer artists like Robert Mapplethorpe and David Wojnarowitz; and the ongoing legacy of the "sex wars" that roiled feminists and birthed a vocal feminist sex-radicalism during the 1980s. [4] Queer was not only a term explicitly mobilized within a series of highly charged political and cultural conflicts; it was a term that seemed to carry within it the loaded transgression and charged sense of struggle around sex and sexual cultures that was cropping up seemingly everywhere and taking a multitude of inventive cultural forms during the 1980s and 1990s. [5] [...]

That was then, this is now. [...] At a moment when "gay and lesbian" no longer describes a radical and transgressive political constituency, however, this taxes queer studies with pushing itself to remain continually on the move, forever in search of that object, diagnosis, or scene of intervention that will make good on the political promise that inaugurated this field that was not meant to be a field. Robyn Wiegman has argued that fields founded on aspirations for social justice must "perform inexhaustibility continuously" (Wiegman 2012, 122). Given its central anti-identitarian claim - that is, the much reiterated definition of queer as, paradoxically, undefined but as emphatically not synonymous with same-sex sexuality queer studies is perhaps unique in having been founded on the "durational strategy" and "aspirational horizon" of being always elsewhere than where it was before (Jagose 2015, 34).

Kadji Amin, “Haunted by the 1990s: Queer Theory's Affective Histories.” Women's Studies Quarterly 44 (3/4), Fall/Winter 2016, pp. 173-189.

3. Others have written about some of the institutional reasons for queer theory's early appeal. See, for example, Jagose 2015.

4. Indeed, much queer scholarship produced during the 1990s and early 2000s focused precisely on this set of issues. For an argument in favor of considering the 1980s "sex wars" as part of a feminist genealogy of queer studies, see Love's introduction to her special issue of GLQ on "Rethinking Sex" (201 1). Gayle S. Rubin offers a fuller account than I can here of the context of sexual politics in the 1980s and 1990s (201 1).

5. Deborah Gould argues that queer emerged around 1990 as "a new sensibility" that combined "fury and pride about gay difference and about confrontational activism, antipathy toward heteronormative society, and aspirations to live in a transformed world" (2009, 256).

Gould, Deborah. 2009. Moving Politics: Emotion and ACT UP's Fight against AIDS. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Love, Heather. 2007. Feeling Backward: Loss and the Politics of Queer History. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Jogose, Annamarie: “The Problem with Antinormativity.” differences 26(1): 26-47.

Rubin, Gayle S. 201 1. "Afterword to 'Thinking Sex: Notes for of the Politics of Sexuality."' In Deviations: A Gayle Rubin Reader, 182-93. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Wiegman, Robyn. 2012. Object Lessons. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

#kadji amin #quote #queer theory

[dilliebar]

gay censorship rant

hyperfixation rant belowww ignore or read idc

Listen I've said this a million times but one censorship TRAVESTY I will never forgive is Jon Avnet making Ruth and Idgie straight while the actresses desperately pushed for as much affection that they were allowed to show. If you're telling the people who know the characters best and even the person who wrote the characters to "tOnE dOwN tHe gAy" how do you not realize you're in the wrong.

He said he didn't want to make the movie "political", but even for the early 1990's, that's some bs. Someone's existence/orientation is not political, it's homophobia and censorship like this that makes it political. Heck, the gay liberation movement in America happened in the 60's and 70's, I'd say 20 years is about long enough to accept that gay people exist.

And no I will not be hearing "tHeY dIdNt kiSs iN tHe bOoK" bc Fannie Flagg literally wanted them to be together in the movie and even said in the sequel that they were more than "just best friends". And to continue the madness, the dude even said that he wasn't going to read the original book of the movie he was directing until his coworker practically forced him to (special feats. interview).

The thing that makes me so angry about this too is that Fried Green Tomatoes as a lesbian coming-of-age story could've been so helpful to LGBT+ youth, and even though the actresses and the author wanted to portray a lesbian couple in the movie, they had to settle for sneaking in little suggestive moments because "gay ruin our patriarchy"

YOU COULD'VE HAD LESBIAN TITANIC

If I could go back in time and direct this myself I would.

"After Ellen" article (2008) with Mary Louise-Parker that I'm referencing bc censorship makes me angry:

AE: Do you ever wish — I know this is a long time ago, but do you ever wish the story line on Fried Green Tomatoes was a little bit more — MLP: Yes! Well, in some ways I do. I tried to make it a little bit more articulated at the time, but they didn't really want to go that way. And in some ways I wish that it was, and then in some ways I think maybe the audience wouldn't have gone there, so I don't know — I have very mixed feelings about it. Because I tried — I really tried to push it at the time, and they didn't want to go there with me.

AE: Who didn't want to go there? MLP: [emphatically] No one.

AE: Not even your co-star? MLP: Oh no, Mary Stuart did, Fannie Flagg did, but not the director, not the producer, nobody else.

AE: Wow, OK. MLP: But I was really trying to push it, and they were like [shakes head].

#fried green tomatoes #i'm just really upset ok #do you know how awesome that woulda been #it's still a great movie #but let's be honest only because of Parker and Masterson

[certainwoman]

"The special appeal and significance of cinema for many gay men is evident in the way film has developed as a particularly privileged source of and for gay subcultural production. In his pioneering study of subcultural logic, Dick Hebdige contends that subcultures turn on a constitutive process of stylistic bricolage in which they appropriate various objects, texts, and signs from the ‘‘dominant’’ culture and refigure them so as to produce alternative, ‘‘subcultural’’ meanings. As Hebdige sees it, this constitutive process of social articulation allows subcultures to produce and reproduce themselves as ‘‘different’’ from the dominant or ‘‘parent’’ culture through their aberrant modes of cultural consumption.The varied practices of bricolage in subcultures become both the site and the currency of subcultural definition, the space for and tools with which a subculture produces and displays its cultural difference(s). Developing this reading further, Sarah Thornton coins the term‘ ‘subcultural capital’’ to refer to the extensive and often highly developed systems of tastes, knowledges, and competences developed and used by subcultures as marks of distinction and group affiliation. By possessing and exhibiting the requisite forms of subcultural capital, a given subject expresses and ratifies his or her membership in a subcultural group.

(...)

With the massive expansion and increased legitimization of gay subcultural formations in the post-Stonewall period, cinema has continued to play a crucial role in the production and circulation of gay subcultural capital. In line with broader sociohistorical shifts in contemporary culture such as the diversification of leisure markets and the emergence of new entertainment forms, cinema has inevitably lost the position of unrivaled predominance it enjoyed in gay subcultures in earlier decades; today it competes with other media such as popular music and television as privileged sources of gay subcultural capital. Nevertheless, film remains a vital forum of and for collective gay investment and definition The ‘‘older’’ traditions of gay cinematic capital are regularly maintained and passed on through repertory screenings, television broadcasts, gay video stores, and endless references/discussions in gay publications; while more recent screen-based practices such as independent gay/queer cinema and gay/lesbian film festivals have expanded and enlivened gay cinematic capital with a wealth of new texts and pleasures.

(...)

Spectatorship assumes a similarly performative function within gay contexts. For many gay men, spectatorship offers a privileged forum in which to define and express their identifications with discourses of gayness. Daniel Harris claims that, for gay men, film has ‘‘served a deeply psychological and political function’’ because it has provided ‘‘a vehicle for expressing alienation from our surroundings and linking up with the utopic homosexual community of our dreams.’’ Gay spectatorship, he asserts, has developed historically as ‘‘an emphatic political assertion of ethnic camaraderie,’’ ‘‘a way of achieving a collective subcultural identity.’’ This is most obvious in those subcultural contexts of reception referred to above in which individual spectators literally become part of a self-identified gay and/or queer audience. Gay subcultural cinematic practices such as film festivals and the like openly engage and bind spectators together in an ‘‘imagined community.’’ Audiences at these events are, as Samantha Searle notes, ‘‘actualised in what could be described as queer public spheres, taking part in events of off-screen visibility, of subsocial cultural affirmation and pride.’’ Much of the efficacy and appeal of these ‘‘community’’ events lie precisely in the scope they offer for the performative production of gay/lesbian/queer collective identifications, and, as anyone who has ever attended these events can attest, the experience of queer affirmation they provide can be empowering and immensely pleasurable."

Brett Farmer, Spectacular Passions: Cinema, Fantasy, Gay Male Spectatorships

#cinema #subculture #brett farmer #spectatorship #film #queer studies #lgbt #cultural studies

[shadow-patronus]

HI!

I don’t usually make my own posts.  I don’t usually participate in LGBTQIA+ discourse.  I usually just sit in my own little corner and reblog stuff that I like or that I think is important.  You’ll find a lot of fluffy dogs.  A lot of D&D content.  Cute animals.  Fandoms I’m a part of.  Right now, during a big election year, I have also been reblogging some political stuff.  You know.  Usual Tumblr shenanigans.  That being said...

Recently some bile found its way onto my dashboard, and I wanted to give everyone the opportunity to unfollow me and let me know that I should unfollow them, if they support this type of bullshit.

I am bisexual/pansexual.  I use the terms interchangeably.  I recognize the historical importance of bisexuality and what it has meant to the community for decades.  I also recognize that, in terms of the etymology of the word, it doesn’t technically “mean” what “pansexual” means.  And so I choose to also, sometimes, use pansexual, as I feel that it fully encompasses what I am trying to portray as my sexual orientation.  That being said...

I am currently in a M|F relationship, or “straight passing,” as some people choose to call it.  Recently, I’ve seen these sorts of comments showing up on my feed:

“You’re in a straight relationship - straight describes the type of relationship, not the people in it.”

“You can’t deny the privilege that you get from being in a M|F relationship.”

“You can safely marry your partner in virtually any country in the world - there’s privilege in that.”

“This isn’t an oppression contest.  Just accept that you’ve got it better than many other members of the community.”

And to that, I say, emphatically and without any restraint:

Fuck You.

I have lived my entire life battling the internalized biphobia that has been ingrained in me since I was old enough to understand what sexual orientation was.  I’ve dealt with “joking” homophobic remarks from my parents.  I’ve dealt with my mother telling me that my cousin coming out as bi was just a “stunt to get attention,” because, “Bisexual isn’t a real thing.  You either like men or you like women.”  I reached a point where I would express to my best friends that I didn’t actually feel that I was part of the community, despite being bisexual, because “I’ve never had to experience the hatred that comes along with being gay or being transgender.”  I didn’t feel I had EARNED the right to call myself queer.  I told them I was, “really more of an ally.”  All of this because people had convinced me that my interest in women didn’t make me queer.  All because I had never had to experience the hatred firsthand of wanting to hold my girlfriend’s hand or kiss her in public.

You’re absolutely right - it’s not an oppression contest.  We are, all of us, in this battle together, trying to make our identities heard, and make them matter.  We are, all of us, trying to be accepted for who we are, how we choose to express ourselves.

So, no.  I am not in a “straight relationship,” because I am a woman dating a man.  I am in a queer relationship.  Because I am queer.  Because you can’t tack the word “straight” on anything that I do.  It is impossible.  Not because I want to be “more oppressed uwu.”  Not because an ignorant community wants to assume that that’s what I am.  Not because you choose to not acknowledge me because you think I’m “privileged.”  It is impossible because I am queer.  Plain and simple.

ERASURE =/= PRIVILEGE

Removing someone’s identity and denying them status in the community is not privilege.  Someone assuming that I’m straight because I’m a woman dating a man is not privilege.  Just like being a “masculine” gay man that’s assumed straight does not equate to privilege.  Just like being a “feminine” lesbian that’s assumed straight does not equate to privilege.  

It’s been an uphill battle, trying to convince myself that I belong in this community.  It’s been hard to see myself as worthy of the title “queer” and to throw off my, “I’m really more of an ally,” mentality.  Even pursuing and dating women - having relationships with them on different levels - hasn’t managed to make me feel more as though I belong.

So, please.  If you’re of the opinion that because I’m in a M|F relationship ,that I’m “privileged,” and in a “straight relationship,” and that I have it, “easier than _______,” unfollow me.  And, if we’re mutuals, let me know that you feel this way so that I can unfollow you.  Because I don’t need this garbage in my life, making me relive all of the self-erasure and internalized biphobia that I’ve been dealing with for literally my whole life.

[aro-culture-is]

It's that time of year again- pride is coming up and I've already gotten some acephobic dogwhistles crossing my dash.

Below is a list of specifically aphobic dogwhistles that I'll update as I spot them or if you guys suggest them:

Before I begin, a definition of dogwhistles:

“Dog-whistle politics is political messaging employing coded language that appears to mean one thing to the general population but has an additional, different, or more specific resonance for a targeted subgroup. The analogy is to a dog whistle, the ultrasonic tone of which is heard by dogs but inaudible to humans.” - Wikipedia

Not everyone who uses these phrases is intending to have that additional, different, or more specific resonance for aspec people, but if I bold the item, it doesn’t have an okay meaning.

"PDA IS ALLOWED AT PRIDE!1!1!!11" - While a number of ace and aro folx (among others such as trauma survivors) do find that PDA can be triggering or a squick, I've never seen someone legitimately claim that PDA shouldn’t be allowed at pride, as these aphobes insist. Every time I've seen this sort of claim cross my dash, there's 2 things I find to be true: the original blog is acephobic (or a 13 year old and that does tend to be a pretty dumb age due to brain reasons) and there's a legitimate and oftentimes decent conversation by people in the notes about making sure that PDA during daytime events is nonsexual so that minors are safe. That discussion is ok, So are counter arguments. But, PLEASE recognize that emphatic declarations like above are a dogwhistle.

“I support LGBT aces/aros!” - yikes. So, the basic idea here is that this person believes that being ace/aro is a modification of being straight rather than a sexuality or romantic orientation or that same-sex attraction is necessary to be LGBT(Q+) which tends to be completely and immediately contradicted by a generic “but trans people are ok” or just a total LGB or even LG only. They do not actually support aspec people. They support only the letters they claim to support at best. (thanks to @clownpieceoffreedom for suggesting this addition!)

“A is for allies!!!” - not sure how much detail I need here if you’re on my page, but honestly... basically, people who say this fall into 2 main camps: 1) ignorant but trying, and haven’t yet learned enough to know that A is for asexual, aromantic, and agender folx, and 2) the asshats who know that and consider all of those identities invalid. Generally speaking, assume ignorance and evaluate the speaker via searching them, speaking with them, or other methods. 

url including “allo” (especially as “dirty/sex -allo”), “aphobic”, “-course” referencing discourse - this one is subtle, but usually a quick glance at their blog reveals their true nature. Many if not most are frankly speaking, awful and aphobic. If they are of that ilk, you’ll probably find no less than five dogwhistles on the first page. However, some aspec people have claimed these urls because their are alloromantic or allosexual and it is a term for them, among other reasons, so I would advise checking before you reach for the block button. see the section on allo/dirty for why those in particular are included.

“asexuality/aces are homophobic” - this might just be implied but I also recently made a blocklist based around a post that literally referred to aspecs as “ homophobic ace tumblr” because they believe one of the following: 1) that sex-repulsion and romance-repulsion are always referring to seeing same-sex attraction, commonly used in reference to PDA at pride while insisting that aspec people who don’t want to see romantic or sexual situations are telling them not to be gay in public. usually, the aspecs in question were just... talking about romo or sex repulsion and how they handle it because they don’t want to do that. 2) one I can’t fully wrap my head around: aces are homophobic because some gay people will identify as asexual to avoid acknowledging their gay feelings. like... bud. internalized homophobia is a bitch but it’s yours. we welcome you for as long as you’d like to stay, and if you realize that you aren’t aspec, you can feel free to hold onto it for as long as you’d like, but ultimately confronting your feelings is your business. we won’t tell you what to do as a community. if it’s homophobic to respect your feelings and allow you to decide if and when you, a random online stranger, confront your feelings, then it was aphobia when you didn’t tell me likewise to confront my internalized aphobia when I thought I was gay because I knew I wasn’t into the people I was “supposed” to be. you had no way of knowing that and neither do we.

“allo” “dirtyallo” “dirty” etc as a self description particularly with a mocking tone - for some reason a lot of allo people think allo is a poorly made slur of some sort or lumps them in with their oppressors. idk man. they think that it’s clever to use it preemptively or something. I’m not sure but I think that they think our experiences are mocking theirs somehow. it gives me the same vibes as like, those people who insist that political correctness is ruining everything. they don’t know or care to know what the term means so they decide it must be secretly insulting them. insert “i am smart” memes here.

“cishet” - ah, yes, the biggest and most annoying dogwhistle of them all. coopted by exlusionists in which they actually mean “cisgender heteroromantic aces” or more rarely “cisgender heterosexual aros” and usually makes a big point about how “cishets” are awful people who should never be allowed at pride related events etc. typically used in a way that normal blogs have no idea. this is probably the most effective aphobic dogwhistle. as for why it’s bad, see “I support LGBT ace/aros!” above.

pride collections (such as edits of a popular character with pride flags behind them) without asexual/aromantic flags, specifically ones with only LGBT flags - I totally get that not every artist is gonna make edits for every queer identity they know, but I’ve seen enough of these lead back to aphobes that I’m including it regardless. If you don’t see an identity, especially one of the Big Ones... check it out. Do a search. If you aren’t sure what I’m including, here’s an off the top of my head list, contact me for additions b/c I don’t double check what I type enough. Common: lesbian, gay, bi, pan, queer, asexual, nonbinary, trans; less common but still possibly a sign: aromantic, demi -romantic or -sexual, agender, intersex, newer variations of lesbian flags that have significant support.

#aphobia #aro #ace #text #mod kee

[jessekeyes12]

Developer Jesse Keyes turns unconventional into bold statement

If there was ever a case of a building perfectly mirroring its developer, it would be One Seventh and Jesse Keyes. Both are angular, ultra-chic, smart and aggressive. Both are also making their emphatic debut on the New York architecture and style worlds.

Built on a 45-degree angle at the juncture of four different streets where Seventh Ave. South meets Varick and Carmine Sts., One Seventh resembles a hulking helm of a slick, futuristic boat or space-age flying machine. Six stories tall with just four units, the corner building shaped in an angular prism has a façade of manganese ironspot brick and Solarban 80 double-paned glass.

 The side of the building on Seventh Ave. South that parallels the rush of autos making their way to Tribeca or the Holland Tunnel has bold racing stripes and competing slabs of vertical windows. On the mellower Carmine St., Juliet balconies face the local cafes, old-time Spanish restaurants and bootleg record stores. One Seventh blends seamlessly with its intersection and has gainied total community board support.

 "No developer would take a chance on this site, which was operated as a gas station since the 1920s and unused for almost a decade," says Keyes, 35, an investor in the swank Goldbar and a partner in La Esquina, one of New York's hippest eateries. "They said it was too small or that the shape wouldn't work. I saw it as an opportunity. We took design risks with this project that architects generally do with museums and public spaces."

 Designed by Rogers Marvel Architects, the same firm recently awarded the Governors Island commission, One Seventh is allegedly the world's first full-floor triangular residence. To make the project work financially, Keyes' development firm REcappartners worked with zoning attorneys Charles Rizzo & Associates to help get a variance to build higher than the allowed three floors. On top of the building, Keyes built a penthouse duplex with two outdoor terraces, both of which lean toward the corner angle.

"The question we had to answer was, how does one live in a triangle," says Keyes, who plays a hand in every design decision. "When I picture who is going to live here, I see an investment banker with an artist inside or an artist with a lot of money. I see the banker sitting totally naked in a chaise longue at the apex of the 45-degree angle, looking out at the cars driving down Seventh Ave., on the phone with his friends, thinking: 'How am I going to own this town tonight?'"

With hardly any marketing, they have two offers for the four units. One from a banker, the other from the son of a Spanish film producer. Prudential Douglas Elliman's Kevin King, a two-year agent who happens to be the long-time maitre d' at Balthazar, heads up sales. The three 1,371-square-foot, two-bedroom, two-bath apartments are listed for $1,995,000. The 2,106-square-foot, three-floor penthouse with 961 square feet of outdoor space costs $4.45 million.

"We're waiting till the units are completely finished until we formally sell the apartments," says King. "A finished product will show how unique this project is and assure we get what it's worth."

Jesse Keyes comes from both sides of the tracks. His parents were hippies. His mother, a lesbian, split from his father but stayed in Redwood City, Calif., supporting her two children as a gardener. As Jesse puts it, they lived on the "wrong side of the tracks." Ironically, she tended gardens near Jesse's father's estate in Woodside, Calif.

"Mom was a real hippie, and dad was a pseudo-hippie," says Keyes, who was called "Blanquito," or little white boy by his Pueblo Mexican barrio neighbors. "Half the time I was in my poor Mexican 'hood with my mom and the other half with a swimming pool, Mercedes, Porsches and horses with my dad."

Keyes talks openly about his desire but inability to communicate with his Spanish-speaking neighbors. He talks openly about almost everything, especially his drive to never stop learning or moving.

"There's a point where you grow up in suburbia that you say I'm either going to get stuck in this for the rest of my life or do something fascinating or interesting," he says. "I was visiting a friend in Mexico City when I was 17 years old. We were in his family's penthouse and I was looking over the slums of the city, whose people needed major help at the time. I thought to myself, we as capitalists need to do better for these people. It was then that I knew I needed to focus on this for the rest of my life."

For Keyes, that meant Princeton, a year in Spain to learn the language, a Fulbright Fellowship and a master's in architecture in Catalonia, a Kinne Fellowship in the Dominican Republic, a job with the prestigious Boston Consultant Group, a master's in real estate from Columbia University, a doctoral candidacy and teaching fellow at Rutgers University in Urban Planning, and roles in the Gore and Kerry presidential campaigns.

"My father is good friends with Gore from St. Albans," says Keyes, whose great-grandfather on his father's side was Democratic Senator Morris Sheppard from Texas who championed Prohibition and women's rights. "My goal was eventually to work in Housing and Urban Development [HUD]. After those two losses, I planned to teach and research through my 30s. But academia, especially in our current political climate, was not as fulfilling as I thought. Building strong architectural projects is a way to make my mark and some money. Eventually, I will get back into affordable housing and giving back in some way."

Keyes' next project is already a major coup for him and New York. Working with Habita, a Mexican group known globally for designing and operating some of the world's chicest boutique hotels, Keyes will open a Mexican-themed, mixed-use hotel and condo project in a location below Houston St. on the East Side. Mexican architect Enrique Norton, who designed One York on Canal St. in New York and the Guggenheim in Guatemala, is an equity partner in the project.

"I want to make a unique statement and be part of the next big place," says Keyes, whose groomed beard and middle-parted hair give him the look of Al Pacino in "Serpico." "You hope it doesn't become something like what happened in the Meatpacking District, which had little thought and planning and became oversaturated with the same product, bars and restaurants. There should be mixed use there. And the Hotel Gansevoort is a mistake. I don't know how they got that built."

Slightly controlling, obsessive about details, and intellectually strategic, Keyes even wrote the copy for the One Seventh marketing materials. (I haven't met a developer yet who does that.) He prefers to focus on one project at a time as opposed to stretching himself thin and losing touch with the day-to-day decisions that these high-design projects demand.

"Scalability will be hard because for each project I'm looking for a specific art and message," says Keyes. "In any case, when you get bigger you lose control over certain levers, and I don't want that to happen."

Still, according to Thaddeus Briner, the architect for One Seventh, formerly of Rogers Marvel (and I.M. Pei's firm) and now on his own, Keyes is a very good client. "This was a dream project," says Briner. "It combined a really challenging site with an extremely progressive client. Those don't come along very often."

Resource :   https://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/real-estate/developer-jesse-keyes-turns-unconventional-bold-statement-article-1.339485

[rotationalsymmetry]

A brief history of Unitarian Universalism (casual, with swears, have not fact checked as such but I think it’s correct): In New England back before US independence, there was Calvinism -- you know, that predestination thing, you’re already going to go to heaven or hell, but you should be good anyways so people will think you’re going to heaven, or something like that. Then there wasn’t. Then there was Congregationalism. Which was a lot more chill, but still very “fuck Catholicism”. And around this time, deism was on the rise: the idea that maybe God created the universe, then fucked off, and hasn’t been actively involved with anything since. Then, some people who were actually reading the Bible, because you can’t look down on Catholicism unless you actually read the Bible, were like... wait, maybe Jesus isn’t all that. You know -- the Savior, the Son of God, one third of the Trinity, all that. Maybe he was just, like... a prophet, or some guy who said some interesting things. A teacher. And other congregationalists were like: uh, what, no, Jesus has to be all that. If you don’t think Jesus is all that, how can you even call yourself a Christian? And they decided they couldn’t really be around each other any more. So the first group, which was mostly in Boston, started calling themselves Unitarians (because they rejected the doctrine of the Trinity and instead believed in a one part God), and incidentally at some point also stopped calling themselves Christians because the other guys had a point, and the others called themselves the United Church of Christ (UCC.) Emerson and Thorough -- sorry, Thoreau -- were both Unitarians, as were John Adams, John Quincy Adams, and pretty much everyone else from Boston in early US history. (We like to claim Jefferson, because his beliefs were kindasorta similar to Unitarian beliefs at the time, but as I understand it he was never actually part of a Unitarian congregation.) (Btw: if you’re lgbtq+ and Christian, they’re a pretty friendly denomination. If you’re lgbtq+ and Christian and you think the UCC is too liberal (in the religious sense) or you want a majority-lgbtq+ congregation, consider MCC, which is otherwise unconnected to all this. If you’re not Christian and are lgbtq+ -- atheist/agnostic, or maybe something else if you’re down with worshipping with people that aren’t specifically your thing -- Unitarian Universalism tends to be pretty good. As in: we have a bunch of gay/lesbian ministers and other religious leaders, and a few transgender ones. (Knowledge of less mainstream lgbtq+ identities can vary a lot between congregations and generations -- the younger generations tend to be more aware than the gen x’ers.) I’ve been involved with Church of the Larger Fellowship for most of the past year, which did zoom worship before it got cool and serves people around the world, and people like me who live a mile from a UU brick and mortar congregation but still can’t get their disabled ass over there anyways. Anyways, CLF has more POC on the worship team than most UU congregations (the denomination does tend to run pretty white), is very social justice oriented even by UU standards, and is somewhat more cool about general weirdness than most congregations, which again for UU congregations is saying something.) Then, at some point (sadly, I’m significantly more familiar with the history of the first U than the second) there was this other protestant denomination in the South (as in, the US South) where people decided that God was too nice to send people to hell for all eternity, so they started calling themselves the Universalists, as in Universal Salvation. All dogs go to heaven. Well, time passed, each denomination evolved in its own way. (In particular, Unitarianism caught humanism pretty hard -- the joke was the Unitarians believe in one God at most.) In the -- ok, I’ll look this one up -- in 1961, there was a big old merger, creating Unitarian Universalism, and in the process, everyone got together and was all...wait, so what are our official beliefs about God and stuff? Should we even have official beliefs about God? Maybe we can unify around some ideas around how people should treat each other instead. So they did: they drafted a set of Principles (broad-strokes guidelines on how people should act -- peace is good, truth is good, people have value, stuff like that) and a set of Sources (where UU’s get their ideas about God and morality and so on from, starting with direct experience) and left everything else up to the individual. And then a little while later, the tree-huggers got a seventh Principle and a sixth Source added in -- respect for the environment and Earth-centered religions, respectively -- so now the joke is that UU’s believe in one God, more or less. Currently there’s a movement on to add an 8th Principal that explicitly names racial equality and fighting oppression as something we value, since while the current Principles mention justice and equality, they don’t specifically name race, and the people of color who have stuck with the predominantly white denomination figure Unitarian Universalism can and should be doing better on that front. Unitarian Universalism runs religiously liberal (ie, decentralized, individualistic, non-authoritarian, non-dogmatic, inclined to believe science over the Bible) and politically progressive. Unitarian Universalist congregations tend to be very politically active and concerned with social justice, mostly in a well-educated middle class kind of way: committees, Robert’s Rules of Order, donating to non-profits, Get Out the Vote, inviting in speakers and asking “questions” that aren’t really questions, forming partnerships with other congregations and community organizations, etc. Many UU congregations have put a Black Lives Matter sign out (and when necessary keep putting it out when it gets torn down or vandalized), shown up for the protests, opposed the weird immigration BS that’s been going on in the US recently, etc. In addition to more charity style work, like food pantries and homeless shelters.

Point is: yeah it’s got flaws (don’t even get me started on Unitarian Universalism’s flaws) but if you’re a social justice person and want to meet other social justice people who are doing things, Unitarian Universalism can be a good place to look for that. You get more done in groups.

You’re less likely to burn out, too. With marginalization, it’s complicated, right? Again, for LGBTQ+ people, it’s going to be better than most religious organizations. For people a little bit on the autism spectrum, you probably won’t be the only one. (If you’re unmistakeably autistic, people might be weird/ableist; it might depend on the congregation.) If you’re from a working class background or are currently kinda broke, you might run into some frustrations or feel like you don’t fit in; if you’re a poc or if you’re disabled (or your kid is) or you want a lot of personal support, you might struggle more -- this really might vary a lot, but at least the congregations I’m used to tend to assume congregants can mostly stand on their own feet, metaphorically speaking, and have some extra time/money/skills/whatever that can be directed out into the wider world. It can be a good place for pagans and Buddhists and other people who don’t want a church but are having trouble finding a church-like religious community where you can hang out with people on the same spiritual path. (Uh, for a while UU congregations were emphatically not churches and some officially still aren’t; others gave up and were all “eh, it looks like a church, whatever, we’re just a weird church.) Some congregations are more atheist-dominated than others -- many avoid Jesus language most of the time, some avoid God language most of the time (UU’s who believe in God tend to believe in God in a relatively abstract/metaphorical way), some I hear are pagan-heavy, others do use Christian language a lot more. In all honesty you don’t have to go to Sunday worship if you don’t want to, and really a lot of UU’s don’t; if you want to be heavily involved in the congregation but don’t want to go to Sunday worship and don’t want to deal with pressure to, one way out is to teach RE (religious education -- basically “Sunday school”) the RE curricula are amazing, just absolutely astounding, and if you’re teaching it you get a ton of leeway with adjusting anything you don’t like. (Which could happen -- a lot of this stuff was developed before the idea that cultural appropriation is a big problem became mainstream in social justice circles.) What adult worship is like has basically zero correlation (perhaps negative correlation) to what RE is like. (Which sucks for young adults coming of age in a UU congregation, like I said don’t get me started on UU’s flaws.) Finally: for people who care about sex positivity and sex ed, Unitarian Universalists (in partnership with UCC) developed Our Whole Lives, a sex ed curriculum that, well, it’s not abstinence based education. You wouldn’t expect sex ed coming from a religious org to be better than the sex ed in schools, would you? And yet. Comprehensive sex ed that acknowledges gay bi and trans people and that disabled people have sex too and teaches about birth control and masturbation and abuse and consent and boundaries and bullying and internet safety and abortion. It’s good stuff. The course aimed at teens is most popular of course, but there’s actually (age-appropriate) OWL curricula for all stages of life: young kids, adults, older adults, everyone. And it’s versatile enough to be taught in secular contexts (after school programs etc). Given the direction that unfortunately a lot of school districts in the US have been going in in terms of sex ed, it’s a really important program.

#Unitarian Universalism #unitarian universalist history #feels weird plugging the denomination when I get so frikkin frustrated but still #if it's not something you know about and you care about social justice #it's something you should know something about #even if you're not interested personally #I'm open to questions on this drop me a line

[violet-bookmark]

Lady knight, by L-J Baker

After Shadow of the knife I still was in the mood for literature inspired by ye olde medieval times, but for some reason Rangers at Roadsend was not doing it for me. I am not a quitter and I will definitely review that book soon (at least before the end of this year) but this time I needed something more chivalric and gritty, but with a happy ending to not end up dead inside like with SOTK.

Enter Lady Knight. This is a story about a female knight who is struggling to make a living and is forced to hire her sword to dishonourable lords who are complete assholes, since no reputable order would take her because she is female. She is very cool, gender non conforming and amazing, and not gonna lie, she had my heart from the first page (Riannon marry me pls). She is also ailed by a mysterious poison/supernatural power that seeped into her body via some wounds she took from a magical sword in a past war in Vahl, which almost kill her at times, until her cousin Aveline, naer of a religious order, entrusts her with a magical sword of her own who seals the demonic power inside her and prevents it from killing her as long as she keeps the sword close.

Aveline was interesting, but a complete asshole at the begging. I liked the scenes where she was talking with the goddess, since they were very mythical and immersive, but she treated the women she slept with like dirt. There was a moment in which she just had sex with a priestess and she thought something like "this woman's ambitions will probably never go further than an orgasm", which speaks for itself about what kind of person she is. She was also quite fond of crusading against infidels, which was historically accurate, but I still hated it. I liked how she cared for Riannon in her own way, how ambitious she was and how she knew what she had to do to obtain what she wanted.

Before diving into the character of Eleanor, Riannon's love interest, I want to adress something that bothers me immensely about how some people interpret her. A long time ago, before I even had this book, I read some reviews about it in which she was described as "straight" and talked about as if she was an insipid character. Not the case. She is obviously bisexual: she expresses past interest in men, but she is also the one to show interest in Riannon and to pursue her, and there are so many times in which she talks about her newfound attraction to women in a relatable way for same-sex attracted women. She also wants to reciprocate during the sex scenes and talks about how much she wants to see Riannon's breasts, to touch her vulva and to perform oral sex on her, which does not sound straight in the slightest. How can anybody read these scenes and think "oh yeah, this character is straight"? Every time I was reading one of their scenes together, I kept thinking about how damn obvious it was that she was not. She is bisexual! She is also very interesting, compassionate and smart; a social butterfly who is well aware of the limitations that society imposes on women, but who also knows that in order to gain freedom she needs to follow the rules to a certain extent (and to keep paying a hefty price of coin to the queen for her right to remain a widow, instead of being sold in marriage as a prize to one of the queen's male vassals). She was also quick to emphatize with other women and to try to make things better for them in unpleasant situations (there is a scene in which her teenage niece is getting married to a much older man, and she comforts her to the best of her ability before the wedding night, remembering when she was younger and in the same situation as her) and she was just a lovely person all around. She was my favorite character along with Riannon, and I shipped them so much. I joked before about marrying Riannon, but if I could choose I would probably want to BE like Riannon and marry Eleanor, she is that great.

The romance was very well done, very romantic in a medieval-esque way, very sweet and very healthy, something that I was grateful for after the sucker punch that was SOTK in that regard. Both lovers treated each other as equals and accepted each other despite their differences; at first I half expected Eleanor to be horrified by Riannon's masculine appearance, but she was not. Unlike the 99% of the characters (the 1% being Aveline), who treat Riannon like dirt for being gender non comforming, she was curious and accepted her and never thought she was weird or bad, or that she had to change. Riannon also saw more to Eleanor than other people did; the majority of men and women only saw her as a rich, beautiful widow good either to bed or to use as a pawn for their plans, while Riannon treated her as a person with interests, personality, wants and desires.

The author had obviously done her research about social strata, languages and traditions, something that I appreciated a lot and made the world building feel very cohesive and realistic, and a lot more medieval than in SOTK. By the way the characters talk and think you can just feel they are from another time, used to another kind of life and bound to different moral codes. I loved that. Only thing I would complain about (which is a BIG pet peeve of mine) is how what I assume to be the equivalent of Ireland in the story was named Iruland. I have done some research and from what I can tell that was never the name of Ireland, not even during any medieval period, so why? I know the author probably wanted us to be able to identify it as the equivalent of Ireland, but just changing a letter of the name to do that is lazy writing in my opinion. She could have done that in other ways, like showing cultural and historical similarities to Ireland or just saying "Ireland" and calling it a day if she did not want to go through the effort of expanding on world building. It was like when, in The Golden compass, the equivalent of the romani people in that world were called "giptians" (in my country's original language it was worse, they did the same as this book and only added a damn letter to "gypsies"). Why would you do that? It was especially jarring in TGC, since there were already another ton of cultural cues pointing to the "giptians" being a (lazily done) equivalent of the romani people, why didn't Phillip Pullman give them another name? To this day this question haunts me, and I resent this book for reminding me of it.

I liked this book's approach to magic. I liked how it felt mystic yet very medieval-like, not flashy, notorious and easy to control like in other types of fantasy, and in some scenes you did even wonder if it was magic at all what was happening. This is my favorite type of magic in fantasy, I am not keen on the type that is flashy and easy to master, like in Harry Potter (I can like a saga despite of that, but still), so I loved that. It felt very much like "invisible forces that humans can never control completely despite their well-organized rituals, and work in mysterious but undeniable ways", which is my favorite type ever of how to depict magic.

I enjoyed the plot and the political maneuverings a lot and wish we actually got to see more of that, it actually had a lot of potential and could have spanned for several books. More boring YA books have made it to a trilogy with less plot. A lot of interesting stuff was going on but the romance took precedence, and a lot of elements that could have been more explored got swept under the rug. I get it; it is a romance book and a lesbian one to boot, so it is "niche", but a second book would have been great to resolve some elements that were left open in the first book. The ending is hopeful and kind of open, but it was not the type of book in which an open ending makes sense. I might be biased here, but I would have liked a closed ending, since so much was left in the air: did Aveline succeed in her plans? What happened with Cicely? And the baby? Will the magic sword always have its power? Aveline saw a vision at the begining of the book, but will it happen at the end of the war? There is too much left untold. More than anything, I also wanted to see Riannon and Eleanor living together happily until they reached old age. I get the author was trying to send the message that homosexual love always faces hardships in an intolerant society and that there is always hope, but I wanted to see more of the two women being happy, especially since the chapter before the ending was so heartwrenching. I won't spoil anything but a character is raped, the rapist is killed in the next chapter in a very befitting way, but still. The aftermath was very hard to read.

I recommend this book if you like political intrigue and gritty storylines similar to Game of Thrones, but not that sadistic and with more focus on female characters and more female empowerment. In fact, if I had to describe this book with a single phrase it would probably be "the lesbian game of thrones, minus the dragons and more realistic all around". However, if you are not in the mood for holy wars, violence, magic swords and ye olde medieval misogyny, give it a hard pass.

#Lady knight #L-J Baker #lesbian literature #bisexual literature #wlw books #female knight #literature #Violet reviews #gnc protagonist #happy ending #fantasy #tw rape

[featherquillpen]

Poetry Watches DS9: “Second Skin”

Kira has to deal with Cardassians apparently? Oh hell yes.

On a related note, Autostraddle just posted a list of female Star Trek characters ranked by lesbianism, and while Kira was #6, just behind Jadzia, in my heart is she is the #1 lesbian.

aaaaaand the episode opens with Jadzia and Kira on a date at the replimat. how did you know exactly what I wanted, show?! 

the only way they could have made this better: Bashir and Garak!

I love the way Garak says “My dear doctor, you have a vivid imagination” in the exact tone of “Finally you figured it out my dear, of course I would be brutally murdered”

ExCUSE ME WTF WHY IS KIRA A CARDASSIAN??????

the true crime is that they gave Cardassian!Kira long hair. LET KIRA BE BUTCH

this elaborate gaslighting routine reminds me of the whole Cylon Model Three and Starbuck thing in BSG. and Ronald Moore was on both shows.

omg good on you Sisko, extorting Garak.

fuckity whaaaaat the Kira corpse is so creepy!

the fact that Garak is STILL keeping up the innocent tailor premise right after using a genuine Cardassian central command clearance code is so fucking brazen I can’t even handle it. Garak is a LEGEND.

Odo is such a good member of an infiltration party. No one expects the bag of goo to be a cop!

omg Garak’s sarcastic flirting with Cardassian!Kira

love how easy trans-species cosmetic surgery is in the future..... why, it’s almost as easy as putting on makeup......

I love that the DS9 crew helped a politically dissident Cardassian. And that Kira got to meet a nice Cardassian (Garak emphatically does NOT count)

#poetry watches ds9 #star trek ds9