Emilia
It’s always easy to dismiss relationship and sex guides as remedial - unnecessary for anyone who already considers themselves an adventurous libertine. The reality is that developing relationship skills is lifetime work, our sexual needs and practices change over time, and each new relationship has its own unique lessons.
Valerie Alexander, on Partners in Passion (via cleispress)
hunnybunnyblr:

Why
I completely accept that oppressed people have every right and reason to be angry and to extend that to me, but having people be angry at me for any reason is very anxiety inducing (shuts me down for the rest of the day). How should I improve myself?
Anonymous

cease-and-de-cis:

People being angry at me causes a lot of anxiety for me as well (it tends to cause a snowball effect with my depression and ADHD as well so it actually screws up the next day too, it’s wonderful). I mean, but I also get pretty bad anxiety from things like people reblogging stuff from TERFs and people who I trust saying horrible things, even on accident.

Talking about oppression and privilege is very difficult for people with anxiety, there’s no disputing that.

I don’t think it’s a matter of “improving” yourself, because getting anxiety from something like that isn’t your fault or something you are choosing to happen. That being said, I’ve tried a couple strategies that have helped me.

  • I’ve tried a lot harder to stay out of conversations that I’m not impacted by. So I don’t tend to comment on posts from POC, physically disabled people, or trans women, talking about their specific oppression which I don’t experience.  It’s a good idea not to do that for multiple reasons. People have one less privileged person barging into their conversations, and I’m less likely get anxiety from being called out for it. Works pretty well.

  • Do you get anxiety from people getting angry at their oppressors as an overall group? I don’t think about those posts as someone being angry at me. I see it as someone telling me not to do whatever it is they are angry about. It’s advice. Even if they are in fact angry at me, it’s easy enough to walk away from it anxiety-free while still learning about how to improve myself.

  • I take breaks. If I can sense something is going down, or someone has gotten angry with me because I fucked up, I often reach out to talk to my friends, or do something else that calms me down or makes me happy. I still take the time to address what is going on, even if it’s just reading and thinking about what happened, but I pace myself and make sure I’m doing self-care at the same time. 

  • It’s ok to step away from specific people who induce your anxiety, even if they’re talking about their oppression. This is counter-intuitive because privileged people shouldn’t ignore oppressed people, but your mental health is important. There are other people you can follow who won’t cause your anxiety, or at least not as frequently. Some people express anger frequently and call out people on a regular basis. That’s completely ok, but it can be draining to witness every day. I’m saying this as someone who has been on both sides of this situation. I’ve had people unfollow me because what I post causes them anxiety, and in a lot of those cases I completely understood where the person was coming from. It can be a fine line between trying to ignore your privilege and doing something you need to do for your mental health. 

A main thing to remember is that their reaction is never at fault. And it’s ok to fuck up, what matters more is how you respond to being called out. It’s ok to step away from something to take care of yourself. I hope this is helpful! As always, others can feel free to chip in their thoughts. 

filthkid:

*thinking about girls* wow

Do you feel that there is racism in the ASOIAF books' representation of its PoC other than the general lack of them? (It seems like very many live in its WORLD but don't proportionally participate in the story). Which brings up another question I have: Have you ever written a post concerning the extent to which individual authors have a responsibility to represent PoC? If you have, I would very much be interested in reading it.

medievalpoc:

Absolutely.

If you want to talk about “responsibility” on the part of individual authors, you can go ahead and read it from the horse’s mouth.

He really believes he is basing this story on history, and that is his response to lack of and poor representation of people of color in his stories:

So let’s talk about the internet controversy about Oberyn Martell. Do you have any thoughts on that?

I commented on my blog. You can find a more studied response there. I made a couple of comments as to what people said about that. I always pictured Oberyn Martell in my head as a — what I call a Mediterranean type. I know people attacked me for that by saying “He’s ignorant, he doesn’t know that Africa is on the Mediterranean.” No, I know Africa is on the Mediterranean. But in common parlance, when you say Mediterranean you are thinking Greek, Italian, Spanish. When you are thinking Moroccan or Tunisian that’s North African. That’s the way people talk about that.

I always pictured the Martells and the salty Dornishman as Mediterraneans, so the casting I think is perfectly appropriate with what I wrote in the books. I do sympathize. I mean, I understand.

Some people have written me some very heartfelt letters, and I’ve tried to respond to them about how they wanted to see someone who looked like them in the books, and how they were [disappointed]. They had pictures of the Martells looking like them, and they were disappointed.

I understand that, but it still wasn’t my intent to make… Even the terminology here is such a land mine. I don’t even know what words to use here “black” or “African.” I used African at one point, sort of like African American. [But] if you use “African” you are guilty for saying all Africans are the same.

I don’t know. I am drawing from history, even though its fantasy. I’ve read a lot of history, The War of the Roses, The Hundred Years War. The World back then was very diverse. Culturally it was perhaps more diverse then our world, but travel was very difficult back then. So even though there might have been many different races and ethnicities and peoples, they didn’t necessarily mix a great deal. I’m drawing largely on medieval England, medieval Scotland, to some extent medieval France. There was an occasional person of color, but certainly not in any great numbers.

^ I consider this to be a cop out. Added on to the fact that he seems more concerned about getting criticized for using the wrong word than massive disappointment on the part of his own fan base. It more or less reeks of “everyone’s so P.C. these days! Ugh!”

I mean, there is plenty of historical precedent for even large numbers of various people of color in all of those nations. You can read articles about forensic archeology and recent discoveries that have challenged these notions to the breaking point. Like, as in 20% people of color. Take 4th Century York, England. According to Dr. Hella Eckhardt:

It helps paint a picture of a Roman York that was hugely diverse and which included among its population, men, women and children of high status from Romanised North Africa and elsewhere in the Mediterranean.

Eboracum (York) was both a legionary fortress and civilian settlement, and ultimately became the capital of Britannia Inferior. York was also visited by two Emperors, the North-African-born Emperor Septimius Severus, and later Constantius I (both of whom died in York). All these factors provide potential circumstances for immigration to York, and for the foundation of a multicultural and diverse community.

I can tell you the same things about Scotland, France, Central Europe…all these regions had seen large influxes of immigrants in the late Roman and early Medieval Eras. After all, these people didn’t just disappear hundreds of years later when historians decided a new “period” of history had begun! There’s plenty of primary sources and documentation that many specifically Black people lived and worked in various Medieval European cities and towns.

Also, speaking of Empires, there was also a rather important Mongolian Empire that happened firmly within an time frame that is pretty universally recognized as “Medieval”. Which, very unfortunately, brings us to the Dothraki.

Here’s GRRM, from the same interview, on the Dothraki:

People complain that the Dothraki are this one-dimensional barbarian society.

I haven’t had a Dothraki viewpoint character though.

I guess it’s too late to introduce one now.

I could introduce a Dothraki viewpoint character, but I already have like sixteen viewpoint characters. I could kill some of my viewpoint characters, to get down to the seven or eight I started with, or some numerical equivalent. The Dothraki are partially based on the Huns and the Mongols, some extent the steppe tribes like the Alvars and Magyars. I put in a few elements of the Amerindian plains tribes and those peoples, and then I threw in some purely fantasy elements. It’s fantasy.

Are they barbaric? Yeah, but the Mongols were, too. Genghis Khan — I just saw an interesting movie about Ghengis Khan, recently. I’ve read books about Genghis Khan, and he’s one of history’s more fascinating, charismatic characters. The Mongols became very sophisticated at certain points, but they were certainly not sophisticated when they started out, and even at the height of their sophistication they were fond of doing things like giant piles of heads. “Surrender your city to me, or we will come in and kill all the men, rape all the women and make a giant pile of heads." They did that a few times, and other cities said, "Surrender is good. We’ll surrender. We’ll pay the taxes. No pile of heads, please.”

*puts hands over face*

*groans*

Okay, let’s talk about how and why a guy who “reads a lot of history” gets this kind of idea about Mongol people, and apparently friggin Plains NDNs people as well (TW for murder gore, rape at link and f*ck you very much Mr. Martin, jeeeeebus.)

There is no equivalent for the Dothraki in history. What people point to most often is the Mongol invasions in Asia and Europe, but these generalizations are originally extrapolated mostly from the accounts from invaded nations written by someone who had heard this or that about what had happened. I’m not saying like, “such and such never happened” I’m saying it didn’t always happen, and also that there’s a lot more to the story, and also that this narrative dominates for a reason.

We’ll do an example. Here you have something like this from UWGB, which heads up their “Mongol Values” section with a supposed quote from Genghis Khan. Here’s what the claim is, right? We have this translation of something he supposedly said here:

The greatest joy a man can know is to conquer his enemies and drive them before him. To ride their horses and take away their possessions. To see the faces of those who were dear to them bedewed with tears, and to clasp their wives and daughters in his arms.

Okay, so basically, Conan the Barbarian. The article, which, might I remind you, is on a college site, goes on from this to say:

Or to paraphrase it in the bluntest possible modern terms: “To kill people, take their property, see and enjoy the pain you have caused their families, and rape their women as a final gesture of power.”

Okay, well that’s is a pretty big “I decided this means exactly what I already expected someone I think Genghis Khan was like would say.”Even if you did decide to take this at face value…that’s still not the casual attitude toward sexual violence the Dothraki demonstrate, it’s the opposite.

I could go into how women in Mongol culture had a great deal of power (which doesn’t necessarily translate into conquered women being perceived as equivalent, but might I remind you that Dothraki women in ASOIAF appear to be chattel with zero bodily autonomy evidence of sentience, for the most part), or how women having sociopolitical power does not equal a lessening of sexual violence by necessity….but.

I could mention that the way in which Genghis Khan was able to stabilize and actually rule such a vast empire was by giving conquered MEN to his DAUGHTERS in marriage, but then took these husbands out on campaign with him, and replaced them as needed when they died. Or that his empire was actually inherited by his daughters.

And then this article goes on to make statements about we know from Genghis Khan’s attitudes and sadistic enjoyments (more or less) that hope for humanity’s goodness will always be futile, because there will always be Hitlers and Stalins.

^^^That is their section on “Mongol Values”. D:

Soooooo……yeah.

People who claim that GRRM’s Dothraki are realistically based on Mongolian or Plains NDN culture are pretty much in “Einstein and Hammurabi Disco Dance in a Hot-Air Balloon" territory.

Thanks to Historians like the above and GRRM, people think “Mongolian=pile of heads, nonstop rape” . There’s no Khutulun, Wrestler Princess, among the Dothraki. There is no Queen Manduhui, no Lady Hö’elün, no Empress Chabi, no Sorghatani Beki, no mention of The Great Khanum and eight princesses Ruy González de Clavijo saw and marveled at in 1403.

GRRM took a society of women who could own property, divorce at will, hold political office and positions of military command, and replaced them with visibly dirty, grunting animals being raped publicly in the dirt [tw link for an image of what i just described].

Because “historical accuracy”.

Because oh, well it’s already done and it’s too late to change it now.

Actually, all of it sounds incredibly familiar:

image

"We cannot simply change it"

"I could introduce a Dothraki viewpoint character, but I already have like sixteen viewpoint characters"

"I guess it’s too late to introduce one now."

It’s always too little, too late, try again, make your own, better luck next time.

So, when do we get to stop being force-fed vile stereotypes with our fantasy? When do we get wish-fulfillment and escapism?

The bottom line is, I don’t know because the this is the industry right now:

image

How are supposed to break the vicious cycle of whiteness in publishing, whiteness of SF/F authors, whiteness of characters, othering, misogyny, degradation, stereotypes, and a history of a Black-White Good-Evil dichotomy?

Why does it matter? Because people think this is real, people think this is accurate, people think this is acceptable, people think this is historical, including, apparently, the people who are writing these stories.

We must change the narrative to change our stories, because lies about the past are in danger of dictating our futures.

pastelle-prince:

seriously though, list of fucking awful trends in the gay male community:

  • "sassy black woman" voice
  • t-slurs everywhere and rampant transphobia
  • talking down to women/harassing them because “it’s ok i’m gay lol”
  • transphobia towards trans men (ew, vaginas!!!)
  • misogyny towards cis women (more ew, vaginas!!!!)
  • "gay is the new black" (says white gay men)

like can we just address

soradiesinkh3:

ourtimeorg:

Ever notice how the people calling millennials lazy are the ones offering unpaid internships?

OOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooo

soradiesinkh3:

ourtimeorg:

Ever notice how the people calling millennials lazy are the ones offering unpaid internships?

OOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooo