#Discrimination History USA

[lifestyle-hub]

A Crime to be 'Ugly'?: A Look at one of America's Most Cruel Laws

Image Credit: Polina Tankilevitch

Being 'ugly' was indeed a punishable offense in some cities in America for much of the 19th and early 20th centuries. Imagine walking down the street, minding your business, when a police officer stops you because your appearance doesn't fit societal norms. It sounds absurd, but this bizarre chapter in history reveals a disturbing truth about how society once treated the most vulnerable.

The Origins of the 'Ugly Laws'

The so-called 'Ugly Laws' were first introduced in San Francisco in 1867 and quickly spread to cities like Chicago, Denver, and New Orleans. Officially titled the “Unsightly Beggar Ordinance,” these laws targeted people with disabilities, disfigurements, or other physical differences. The justification? Such individuals were considered “unsightly” and therefore not fit for public view.

These laws were rooted in a complex web of social fears and prejudices. During the late 19th century, America was experiencing rapid urbanization and immigration. The influx of people, coupled with the harsh realities of industrial life, brought poverty and illness into public spaces in a way that was difficult to ignore. Instead of addressing the root causes of poverty and disability, cities chose to hide the symptoms by criminalizing the visibility of those who didn’t meet arbitrary standards of physical appearance.

A Law Enforced With Brutality

The enforcement of the Ugly Laws was often brutal. In Chicago, for example, the ordinance stated: “Any person who is diseased, maimed, mutilated or in any way deformed so as to be an unsightly or disgusting object, or an improper person to be allowed in or on the streets, highways, thoroughfares, or public places in this city, shall not therein or thereon expose himself or herself to public view.”

Violators were fined or even jailed. But beyond the legal penalties, the real punishment was the stigma and shame imposed on those who were already marginalized. These laws reinforced the idea that certain bodies were less worthy, less human, and less deserving of public life. They institutionalized the belief that beauty equated to value, a notion that still echoes in today's society.

The Real Victims: Who Were They?

The victims of these laws were primarily people with disabilities, but they also included the poor, the elderly, and anyone who did not conform to narrow standards of physical beauty. A person with a visible disability or someone simply aging naturally could be fined, arrested, or shunned. It was a cruel reminder that public space was reserved for those who fit a specific mold, often white, wealthy, and able-bodied.

These laws also disproportionately affected immigrants, who were often viewed with suspicion. In cities where the laws were enforced, the very people who had come to America seeking better lives were often those targeted and harassed under the guise of public decency.

The Slow Path to Repeal

The Ugly Laws did not disappear overnight. It wasn’t until the mid-20th century, as attitudes towards disability and public health began to shift, that these laws started to be questioned. In Chicago, the ordinance remained on the books until 1974, a shocking testament to how deeply ingrained these prejudices were.

The repeal of the Ugly Laws coincided with the rise of the disability rights movement, which fought for the recognition of people with disabilities as full citizens deserving of dignity, respect, and access to public spaces. Activists like Judith Heumann and groups like the American Coalition of Citizens with Disabilities played a crucial role in shifting public perception and advocating for legal changes that would eventually lead to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990.

A Legacy of Exclusion

Although the Ugly Laws are gone, their legacy lingers in the ongoing stigmatization of people with disabilities and differences. Society still grapples with issues of accessibility, representation, and equality. Public spaces are often designed with the “ideal” body in mind, leaving those who don’t fit that mold to navigate a world that wasn’t built for them.

Moreover, the obsession with physical appearance continues to shape social interactions, media portrayals, and even professional opportunities. While we no longer have laws explicitly banning “unsightly” individuals from public spaces, the underlying bias that fueled the Ugly Laws remains in many forms.

Reflecting on the Past to Build a Better Future

The Ugly Laws serve as a stark reminder of the dangers of a society that values appearance over humanity. They reveal how easily prejudice can be codified into law and how those laws can shape public attitudes for generations. As we reflect on this dark chapter in American history, it’s crucial to remember that progress is not inevitable. The fight for a more inclusive, just society requires constant vigilance and a commitment to challenging the biases that still exist.

Signing out, kad

References

1.The Unsightly Beggar Ordinance: The Origins of Ugly Laws - JSTOR

2. Chicago's Ugly Law - Chicago History Museum

[miawashere]

increase of police brutality

i realized with the death of Jaahnavi Kandula, there has been an increase of police brutality for years. and after researching, police brutality has been increasing- especially with the spark of the BLM movement. In 2021 alone, 1,145 people were reported killed by officers, according to the Guardian. after the killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, it asks the question on whether or not police are more racist to people of color. it’s so sad that because of one’s skin color, you’ll be discriminated by people you’ve never even met before who’s sole job is to protect you.

[gryficowa]

Americans: You must hate Russians! Do you know how many crimes they have committed over the years?!

Ancestors of Ukrainians who raped Polish women, committed massacres and collaborated with the Nazis:

Yes, this is why judging people by their ethnicity because people have done something wrong in the past is fucked up on many levels

Refers here to Volhynia and the crime that took place in Poland by Ukrainian nationalists

The crimes of the ancestors or even the rulers in the country (Putin stinks) shouldn't be an argument here, because what the fuck can they do about it? They don't have the option to time travel to change history, so what the fuck do you require?

This argument of the crimes of Ukrainians was used by many Poles after Russia attacked Ukraine, and many Poles hate Ukrainians for this fucking reason, so according to this logic, Poles were right, so WTF

So when Russia attacked Ukraine, it was karma for crimes against Poles? I'm seriously asking you Americans

Should this matter to you on this topic? If you think that talking about the fact that Russians, compared to Israelis, don't behave like fucking propaganda bots at every step is for you "Propaganda of the good Russian", then according to this logic you are not spreading the "Propaganda of the good Ukrainian"?

Don't you see how your logic fucking fails when you use the crimes of your ancestors or a bad person to spread hatred towards Russians? Seriously, Ukrainians haven't been saints in the past, but that doesn't fucking mean what Putin is doing is right, he attacked civilians, bombs houses and does a lot of shit, let's stop using ancestral crimes to justify and ignore evil, Russians are not bad people, yes they are rotten who support Russian propaganda, but there are many who hate what Putin says and many of them are persecuted for being LGBT+

Because it sounds like the arguments of Zionists that people were against Jews in the past (You know, crimes…), but now all anti-Zionists are anti-Semites (And there are situations when a Zionist attacks a Jew for being "Not Jewish enough", "Without self-respect" etc…)

I'm just going to write about it whether you anti-Russians like it or not, because I don't fucking want to dehumanize people for their origins like you do

[soundwatch]

Rustin

Awards buzz first thrust George C. Wolfe’s biopic about U.S. civil rights activist Bayard Rustin, the openly homosexual (largely use this word and "gay" as the then common "labels") African American architect of the landmark 1963 March On Washington, onto my radar. What’s not to like, right? and onto my (Netflix) watchlist it went.

Plopping up after another biopic, the beautifully mounted but ultimately hollow Maestro, Rustin might have benefitted from a favorable comparison – both films examine the lives of queer men who in one way or another strived for social change in postwar America – not that Maestro even mentions Leonard Bernstein’s philanthropy and support of progressive causes like the Black Panthers, even if Tom Wolfe coined the term “radical chic” to question the sincerity of celebrity political activism, after attending a Bernstein benefit for the Panthers .

Thanks to Netflix’s algorithms and playback mode, the final strains of music from “Candide” accompanying Maestro’s end credits briskly segued into Branford Marsalis’ jazzy Rustin score. The film begins with onscreen text informing us that discrimination based upon race was declared unconstitional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1953. This is followed by wordless horrific images of the humiliation African Americans (here primarily young women) had to endure from whites (largely male with the occasional hateful looking woman) when exercising their constitutional right to attend school. After the film’s title appears briefly, we hear offscreen “things have to change and they need to change now.” It’s 1960 and we witness various civil rights activists, including Martin Luther King (Aml Ameen) and Bayard Rustin (Colman Domingo), planning a non-violent demonstration at the Democratic Convention that summer. Threats of Gandhi-inspired civil disobedience in the 1940s successfully pressured the Roosevelt Administration into ending discrimination in the military and defense industries, so why not use this method again? Yet not all African American leaders are down: NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) head Roy Wilkins (Chris Rock in an unusual serious role) thinks the movement should tread even more lightly to achieve its goals. Longtime Democratic New York City Congressman Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. (Jeffrey Wright), on the other hand, seems primarily angry about a movement he doesn’t control and worried about how a protest might affect his standing within the party. Clayton Powell leans on King to drop the idea and Rustin, too, while he’s at it, otherwise there will be rumors about just how tight King and his charismatic and effective advisor really are. The protest is called off; King reluctantly dumps his friend.

(The Obamas’ company Higher Ground executive produced the film; did Barack Obama think about his former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, with whom he severed ties during his first campaign after Wright spouted antisemitic statements and conspiracy theories? While, unlike the smear campaign against Rustin, Obama’s rupture with Wright was understandable, it might have caused considerable soul searching. Wright later somewhat toned down his rhetoric.)

Rustin finds himself in the political wilderness, living in New York, taking a unfulfilling job with a lefty nuclear disarmament NGO – an all-white joint with, as it turns out, a homophobic boss who claims he just wants to keep Rustin on the straight and narrow. Rustin enjoys the company of a younger white man - smart, sweet, devoted (at times to a fault) Tom Kahn (Gus Halper) and has a support system of accepting friends.

Soon, it’s 1963, and President Kennedy holds a televised speech promising further civil rights legislation. This is received with skepticism (civil rights were apparently not Kennedy’s top priority) which turns into outrage when that evening, images of particularly brutal police retaliation against demonstrators, including hosing down children, appear on TV. “Things have to change,” and this time, Rustin is determined to make that happen. He reaches out to labor activist (head of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters) A. Philip Randolph (Glynn Thurman) and floats the idea of a massive non-violent march, for “jobs and freedom,” on Washington. Randolph is game. Rustin and King reconcile. And so, with Randolph nominally the chief organizer and Rustin running the show in the background, they set out to recruit the other “Big Six” civil rights organizations (in addition to the Brotherhood the NAACP, SNCC - Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, CORE - Congress On Racial Equality, King’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference and the National Urban League) while Rustin sets up a tight logistics operation.

Rustin doesn’t always successfully avoid sentimental biopic clichés, but the film crackles with comic energy when it shows how the dedicated team, under Rustin, both drill sergeant and seducer, manages the nuts and bolts of organizing the march. How many narrative films walk audiences through political grunt work? - from first brainstorming sessions, fundraising for busses to bring demonstrators from around the country to and from Washington to securing food supplies (peanut butter and jelly trumps cheese sandwiches) and Rustin’s contrasting security meetings with the African American brotherhood within NYPD (open to non-violent, de-escalation tactics) and the all-white D.C. police force delegation (latently racist, overstepping boundaries, possibly in cahoots with the F.B.I.). One especially satisfying moment: Rustin, again under pressure and somewhat out of commission, gazes appreciatively at his team as they have become so self-motivated and professional that the well-oiled machine can practically run without him.

Before the big day rolls around, the NAACP still is hesitant unless compromises are made. One: no White House, the protest stays at the Mall (one of the funniest exchanges during the prep sequence shows Rustin asking how many people are needed to surround the White House – a volunteer thinks this is a joke set up before he conveys she better get right on this). And two: the event is shortened from two days to one – considering the messy logistics of tent accommodation and longer leaves of absence from work, maybe Wilkins was being sensible here?

Just when the NAACP is finally on board, Clayton Powell throws a another spanner into the works: again he blackmails the group with Rustin’s long severed Communist Party ties and a 10-year-old rap sheet for lewd conduct with two (adult) men. Wright plays Clayton Powell as a full-fledged villain, jealous of King’s power base in the South and defending tooth and nail his own in New York and D.C. His torpedoing of the 1960 protest is of public record, but didn’t find any mention of his backstabbing in 1963. On the contrary, while Clayton Powell’s long career ended amidst corruption scandals and he was always considered rather self-serving, he is credited for moving civil rights legislation forward and serving his Harlem constituency. This is one instance of the film playing somewhat fast and loose with facts – or fudging them into confusion.

Fortunately, this time, Clayton Powell’s blackmail attempt is thwarted and everyone rallies around Rustin as the guiding force of the march. The big day, August 28, 1963, comes. At first, local police estimates a crowd of 75 before the masses flood the Mall. Martin Luther King holds his legendary “I Have A Dream” speech before 250,000-300,000 people. It was the largest peaceful protest to date. Afterwards, the White House invites reps of the “Big 10” organizations (somewhat confusingly, the film earlier stated that the “Big Six” had mushroomed due to the participation of more unions, but historical records generally speak about the “Big Six”). Rustin contentedly stays in the background, helping to clean up the Mall.

After a final montage which somewhat awkwardly blends archive and staged footage, the standard biopic wrap-up titles add that comprehensive civil rights legislation was passed and signed into law in 1964 (by Kennedy’s successor Lyndon Johnson, a Texas Dixiecrat – conservative Southern Democrat – who nevertheless became more committed to civil rights than his slain predecessor was). That same year, King was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize. Rustin continued his advocacy work and in 1977 met his longtime companion with whom he remained together until Rustin’s death in 1987. In 2013, 50 years after the march, President Obama post-humously awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Rustin.

The titles don’t mention King’s increasingly vocal opposition to the Vietnam War and stronger demands for economic equality. And while King became somewhat more radical in the months before his asassination, Rustin was criticized for allegedly “selling out.” This meant cosying up to the Democratic party und big unions like the AFL-CIO, eschewing Black Power politics and later affirmative action (Rustin thought any form of “identity politics” was counterproductive as it could alienate necessary white allies) and adopting an anti-communist/anti-Soviet stance through his conditional support of the war (rollback of communism - yes, punitive military action against Vietnamese civilians - no). Contrary to his anti-communism, Rustin remained a lifelong socialist through his advocacy of social justice by wealth redistribution. And he was a gay rights activist until the end.

This aspect of Rustin’s life is brought to life through Colman Domingo’s compelling performance. He portrays Rustin as a self-confident, sexually attractive man who defies the homophobia of his era without ever becoming a victim. Rustin’s two key relationships, on the other hand, are not fleshed out. Tom stands by his man with little complaint when Rustin’s flirtations with other men become intense (Rustin admonishes Tom not to act like “Mrs. Rustin”). Tom is a more doormat-like version of Scott Smith (played by James Franco), the similarly long-suffering boyfriend of gay activist and later politician Harvey Milk in Gus Van Sant’s Milk – the screenplays for both films were written or co-written by Dustin Lance Black. As indicated in the film, when Rustin tells Tom he can’t allow himself to fall in love, but Tom will always be his family, the real-life Rustin and Tom Kahn remained friends and even co-authored an article about evolving protest into party politics. Rustin’s second significant relationship in the film was with the fictional Elias Taylor (Johnny Ramey), a NAACP lieutenant and married clergyman, groomed to take over his father-in-law’s congregation. After Elias helps to shoot down Rustin’s suggested march (the soon-to-be KKK murder victim Medger Evans is the only NAACP member who gets and supports it), he approaches Rustin in the men’s room. Elias flirts rather unabashedly; the two convene to a gay bar for drinks and begin an illicit affair. Elias is a mealy-mouthed cipher whose primary attraction for Rustin might be the challenge of converting him to the “cause.” The affair goes on long enough to piss off Tom but is cut short when Elias’ wife Claudia calls Rustin late at night to order him to call it off. The affair foregrounds Rustin’s free-spirited (in his mind) or promiscuous (other people’s judgement) lifestyle and serves the plot as it is Elias who suggests that Rustin reconcile with King for the sake of the movement.

Rustin was not the most accomplished film of 2023 (one wonders how a more seasoned filmmaker like Ava DuVernay would have filmed the story; theater director George C. Wolfe has one other film, Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom under his belt). But it was arguably one of the most thought-provoking. Its images of political activism as a group effort and compelling, complex portrayal of an openly gay African American man in the 1960s whisk audiences back to pre-internet times when protest was organized with considerable effort but arguably had more impact than today’s online-driven activism. Nostalgic, cinematic comfort food or inspiration to counter myriad current injustices? In any case, if Bayard Rustin hadn’t actually existed, he would’ve needed to be invented.

********************************

Recommended: Brother Outsider: the Life of Bayard Rustin (2003), documentary by Nancy Kates and Bennett Singer. Here we see Rustin also speak at the Mall in August 1963, which for some reason the fiction film omits.

Update 1: Colman Domingo was nominated for the Best Actor - Drama Golden Globe (Cillian Murphy took home the award for his portrayal of J. Robert Oppenheimer in Christopher Nolan's eponymous biopic), BAFTA and Oscar. He is the first Afro-Latin actor and, along with Jodie Foster (Best Supporting Actress nominee for Nyad), the first out LBGTQIA* person to be nominated for playing an out LBGTQIA* role.

Update 2: American documentary filmmaker James Blue, a pioneer of participatory filmmaking with grassroots communities, directed this film about the March on Washington:

[elodieunderglass]

History of Black jockeys in the USA: tumblr starter pack

The gif above was created by animating the motion study of “Annie G,” plate 627 of Eadweard Muybridge’s 1887 work, “Animal Locomotion”. The horse is a mare named “Annie G.” The jockey, unknown, is a Black man. It is one of the earliest motion studies on record, and captures some of the first humans and first animals to be recorded this way. (The earlier 1878 Muybridge study of the mare Sallie Gardener is more famous but you can’t really see the jockey.)

The Black jockey is referenced (fictionally) as an ancestor n Jordan Peele’s film Nope (2022) which also looks at the relationship between Black men, horses, and the consumption for entertainment of both of their bodies.

Fold into that what we are learning about today’s acceptance of the jockey-as-consumable, of their body as an accessory, of their wellbeing as mostly irrelevant; but then remember that once upon a time, people cared a lot more about horse racing. This is a big, tricky topic in American horse racing. There was a time in American history when Black jockeys were enslaved and forced into a job that we know is dangerous and consuming. Later there was a time in American history when Black jockeys were incredibly influential and important, competing equally alongside white jockeys, and they were deliberately pushed out of a sport they had mastered.

“The Undefeated Asteroid,” Edward Troye, 1864. Enslaved horse trainer Ansel Williamson, right, holding saddle. Ed Brown, jockey on left adjusting his spurs, was the young enslaved jockey. The groom is unidentified.

Press Keep Reading for an essay/signposts to resources. It’s intended as a jumping-off point for curious people and historians to learn more. TW for racial discrimination and discussion of weight.

As we know by now, jockeys are considered consumable/disposable by their sport; they are athletes whose names are less memorable than their mounts and their working conditions are tough. The sacrifices that jockeys make today to remain strong and light are hard enough when the jockey is willing. They have hard weight limits on their profession. And one of the very dark horrors of this was that young enslaved Black men of small stature and riding ability were singled out and used as jockeys. Their sacrifices would not have been willing. While this essay is about the Black athletes who willingly entered the sport post-abolition, I think it’s important to be up-front about the history of enslaved jockeys in America. Jockeys like Ed Brown (above) were forced into the job very, very young.

Horse racing is a bonkers calling, but it’s also one that people willingly follow. Post-abolition, there were many Black American jockeys who were incredible athletes, their records and statistics still impressive today. In a surge of excellence around the 1890s, Black jockeys rose to remarkable influence and power in America, becoming household names above even the horses, travelling the world, greeted with admiration, true celebrities with their faces on merchandise. At the very first Kentucky Derby, raced in 1875, 13 of the 15 jockeys were Black men.

Between 1890 and 1899, African American jockeys won the Kentucky Derby six times. By the early 1900s, they were history. The key push to exclude Black jockeys came when White jockeys began violently attacking their African American counterparts by boxing them out during races, running them into the rail, and hitting them with riding crops. These attacks prevented Black jockeys from finishing in the money, and endangered fragile and valuable racehorses. Soon after the attacks began, African American jockeys found they could not get rides. Anxiety over job insecurity appears to have played an important role in White jockeys’ actions: there were only a limited number of riding slots. White jockeys would have benefitted in any circumstances from the exclusion of Black jockeys, but in the late 1890s the US was in a depression, and unease about finding rides was especially high. Combined with a growing anti-gambling crusade that reduced attendance at racetracks and eliminated some tracks entirely, jockeys found demand for their services contracting.(National Bureau of Economic Research)

Professor Pellom McDaniels, describing the impact of this on legendary Black American jockey Isaac Burns Murphy:

MCDANIELS: If black people are supposed to be inherently inferior, to have someone who demonstrates success in material terms unravels this idea and therefore those whites during this time period who believe themselves to be inherently superior, something's broken in their psyches. And Murphy represents that kind of attack on white supremacy.

Isaac Burns Murphy, one of the best American jockeys of history, had an unprecedented rate of wins (something like 44% which is almost impossible.) he was born into slavery, but his mother managed to escape with him as a toddler to a Union Army camp. He was inducted into the Jockey’s Hall of Fame in 1955 and Eddie Arcaro was quoted, “there is no chance that his record of winning will ever be surpassed.” (How could it?!)

Today, the American Racing Museum honours many Black jockeys of history in their Hall of Fame, telling some truly incredible stories that are worth browsing.

Like James Winkfield. Born in America 1882, died France 1974. won the Kentucky Derby twice. Left America due to this rising backlash against the growing prominence of Black jockeys, the KKK in particular explicitly objecting to his celebrity and earnings by sending him death threats. Winkfield therefore rode and trained in Europe, settled in Russia, FLED THE 1919 REVOLUTION WITH 200 HORSES?, married an exiled Russian aristocrat (????) and, lest he know peace for five minutes, defended his horses from the European Nazi invasion with a pitchfork(!!!!). Fleeing WW2 to America, where the new racial segregation was now being widely embraced, Winkfield found hotels that had once welcomed the celebrity athlete suddenly turning him away (never forget that segregation was artificial and deliberate.) I am still stuck on him sneaking 200 thoroughbreds out of Russia. Here’s his Britannica article and Hall of Fame bio.

The campaign of racism and terror was successful at driving Black athletes from the profession, and Winkfield was the last Black jockey to win the Kentucky Derby. Jim Crow swept through the USA, and white people in the South comforted themselves with “lawn jockeys,” racist caricature lawn ornaments of Black men in jockey silks.

It wasn’t until the 1970s that Black jockeys began winning high-stakes races in the USA again.

Hopefully this has spurred (ha!) your interest. Here are some links if you find yourself interested in more!

American racing museum: Jockey hall of fame

Kentucky Derby Museum’s Black Heritage in Racing collection

How and Why Black Riders Were Driven from American Racetracks (summary paper, National Bureau of Economic Research)

There is no competition: the legacy of black jockeys (1975 entry in Sepia magazine preserved here. Note that James Winkfield’s picture incorrectly identified as Isaac B Murphy.)

This 1975 photo is from the article above and describes Cheryl Smith, “first Black American female jockey to hold a license.” I haven’t been able to find out much about her, but I’m not a historian - let me know if she takes your interest as a topic!

It looks like there are some big interesting books on the subject, though I haven’t read them myself. If you’re interested in doing a research project, here they are!

The Great Black Jockeys: The Lives and Times of the Men who Dominated America's First National Sport, by Ed Hotaling, 1999

Isaac Murphy: The Rise and Fall of a Black Jockey, by Katharine C Mooney, 2003

The First Kentucky Derby: Thirteen Black Jockeys, One Shady Owner, and the Little Red Horse That Wasn't Supposed to Win, by Mark Schrager, 2023.

[miawashere]

why are labor unions important?

for those of you who might not know, labor unions are organizations of people who come together to fight for equal opportunities and a fair workplace. during the industrial revolution when workers were forced to work in horrible conditions, the workers grouped together and created massive unions to fight for better working conditions, retirement pay, no more child labor, fair wages, and more. labor unions are still around to this day to make sure the modern workplace stays as fair and non-discriminatory as possible. however, this isn’t always the case, but it’s good for unions to still be in place to try and make working less miserable. labor unions can be found worldwide and have big impacts on workers and their rights!

[arowitharrows]

These are some links to recourses on different topics, mostly things I want to be able to find again so I'm collecting them here. Please be aware that many of these articles include discussions of queerphobia, racism or abuse. I can't put warnings on every link, so proceed with caution. This is not meant to be a complete or final list, I will most likely be editing it as time goes by.

Aspec terminology / Flags

Queerplatonic coining post on dreamwidth (x)

Sunset aroace flag original post (x)

A History Of Words Used To Describe People That Are Not Asexual (x)

Discussions of aphobia

Note: I am still waiting for the day when aphobia can be discussed without aromanticism being treated as a subcategory of asexuality.

Stonewall report on asexual discrimination, UK 2023 (x)

Scientific America article on medical stigma against asexuality, USA 2023 (x)

Article about the religious right attacking sexless marriage, USA (x)

Podcast about the religious right attacking platonic marriages and general analysis about why the religious right hate asexuality (and aromanticism), USA part 1 part 2 part 3 part 4

Amatonormativity

Website of Elizabeth Brake, the coiner of the term Amatonormativity (x)

Amatonormativity in the law: an introduction, USA 2022 (x)

Opinion: I grew up in a culture that embraced physical touch. Then I came to America, Ethiopia 2023(x)

'I Dont Want To be a Playa No More': An Exploration of the Denigrating effects of 'Player' as a Stereotype Against African American Polyamorous Men (x)

Romance is not the only type of Black love that matters by Sherronda J. Brown, USA 2018 (x)

Relationship Anarchy

Relationship Anarchy, Occupy intimacy!, Spain 2020 (x) also available in Spanish and catalan

The short instructional manifesto for relationship anarchy (x)

Tumblr post with multiple links about relationship anarchy (x)

Marriage and being Single

Ted talk: how romance and capitalism could destroy our future, 2014 (x)

The escalating costs of being single in America, USA 2021 (x)

Unmarried equality, many articles about discrimination against single people. USA focused (x)

No Shelter for Singles: The Perceived Legitimacy of Marital Status Discrimination, USA 2011 (x)

Loveless Aro

I Am Not Voldemort: An Essay on Love and Amatonormativity (x)

Aroworlds loveless Aro friendly fiction collection (x)

Loveless Aro experiences and explanations (post0 aurea article post 1 post 2 post 3 post 4 post 5 post 6)

[ipso-faculty]

The state of intersex studies

So we recently read the first part of Malatino's Queer Embodiment for Intersex Book Club. It'll be a while until the summary gets posted because we have a backlog (whoops) but this book makes me want to rant.

Having now read a bunch of intersex studies books for the book club has made me acutely aware of HOW MUCH of (American) intersex studies is the same five topics over and over again:

The life of Herculine Barbin

Fuck John Money

Fuck Middlesex

The rise and fall of ISNA + Fuck DSD terminology

Caster Semenya

For the record, Malatino only covered four of these five 🙃. It's honestly getting tiring seeing the same five topics over and over again when there is SO MUCH else that could be talked about.

I'm tired of hearing about ISNA The repetitive focus on ISNA is particularly grating to me because the total amount of text I have head on ISNA's history is greater than the total amount of text I have read on the histories of all other intersex advocacy organizations. 😬 The USA did not invent intersex advocacy and isn't even a world leader in intersex activism (sorry, American friends).

The only text I know of that chronicles the history of a non-ISNA intersex advocacy organization is Swarr's Envisioning African Intersex where she talks about the history history of Sally Gross and Intersex South Africa (and gives a brief shout-out to Julius Kaggwa and other Ugandan activists). Which is weird because...

IGM is banned in Greece! 🎉 And Spain! 🎉 And Portugal! 🎉 And Iceland! 🎉 And Brazil!! 🎉 And Chile! 🎉 And Uruguay! 🎉 There are partial bans on IGM in India and Australia. So why haven't I seen a single book chapter on the history of intersex activism in any of these countries? 🧐 What can we learn from these successful campaigns???

I'm tired of hearing why ISNA failed when I want to be learning how OII-Europe and similar organizations have succeeded. 🫤 There have been more than two people in intersex history Herculine Barbin isn't the only intersex person from history and I would honestly like to see more on other famous intersex people from history, e.g. Isidor of Seville, Helena Antonia, Elen@ de Céspedes, King Francis II of France, King/Queen Christina of Sweden, Princess Ismat al-Doulah of Persia, Sa Bangji, Im Seong-gu, Xie Jianshun, Fernanda Fernández, Gottlieb Göttlich, Karl Dürrge, Karl M. Baer, Lili Elbe, Clémentine Delait, and Annie Jones (Just to name a few that *I* know of!)

Caster Semenya isn't the only intersex athlete to have experienced discrimination! She wasn't even close to being the first! Maybe give some airtime to Maria José Martínez-Patiño, Foekje Dillema, Ewa Kłobukowska, Erik Schinegger, or Witold Smętek? Or even contemporaries, like Duttee Chand or Margaret Wambui?

I'm *really* tired of hearing about Middlesex The repeated critiques of Middlesex have also gotten tiring. The book sucks. This is not news. What I'm not seeing is literary scholars engaging with the growing body of books written by intersex authors like the works of Rivers Solomon, Bogi Takács, Alec Butler, or KOKUMO. And don't tell me they're not "literary" or "notable" enough, Butler has a Governor General's Award and Takács has a Hugo.

Intersex Studies can do so much more! Intersex studies is a young field. I know this. I just wish I'd see more variety making into book format? It's weird seeing the same things get repeated exhaustively when there's so much that doesn't seem to have gotten any attention? Like in book club we talked about intersex people in mythology for a bit and it made me realize we haven't seen anything specifically on this subject and there is so much that could be talked about there. 😯

My rant ends here. If anybody here is looking for a research topic I hope I've made the point that there's a lot of fertile ground that has not been covered when it comes to intersex! 💜 (If you wind up writing anything along these lines please do send it my way! 💜)

[redfoxwritesstuff]

Why Is Misdemeanor Of the Heart's Reader...

White Coded?

Yep, I said it. Come, take a seat and get cozy in the Fox Den while Mamma Kit answers some questions.

CW: Discussions of race and racism in a historical context and me being a wordy ass bitch

I've seen some discourse around Human!Alastor readers and writers and have gotten some of these questions myself over the last few months.

Firstly- I am white. I'm so fucking white that I use SPF 100 sunscreen. I grew up in Alaska. The history I learned growing up wasn't African American history; it was Alaska Native history. I didn’t learn about how we fucked over African American people in America’s early history. Instead, I learned how we fucked over the villages of the land I was raised on.

Why does this matter? The current accepted fanon for Alastor's human life is that he was a Black or mixed-race radio host who died in 1933 and reached his mid to late 30s or 40s. We know he had a successful career and was also a serial killer. He favored jazz, and rye is his drink of choice. He exists somewhere on the ace spectrum.

Time for a little math. Let's go with the middle ground—he was 40 in 1933. That means he would have been born around 1893. Let’s assume his mother was 25 when he was born. She would have been born in 1868. Using the same age for her mother, Alastor's grandmother would have been born in 1843. Remember this—it’ll matter in a minute.

For MisD and all of my human Alastor writing, as well as the works of many other human Alastor writers, we approach Alastor's life through a historical lens. I, like many others, enjoy exploring a time period rich with change—dynamic and vibrant with energy, money, and hope.

What does this mean? This means Alastor would have faced significant amounts of racism. Being Black, mixed-race, or how well he could pass as white would all drastically impact his life. It affected what opportunities he had, the education he received, and how laws were applied to him.

Ready for a history lesson? The Emancipation Proclamation was issued by President Abraham Lincoln on January 1, 1863. It declared all enslaved people in rebellious areas of the United States to be free. Alastor's grandmother—based on the ages we used earlier—would have been a 20-year-old woman at that time.

Alastor would have been raised by a first-generation free woman. He likely wouldn’t have had access to public education, instead being taught in group homeschool-like sessions by those who had learned to read and write.

If he was mixed-race, he would have faced significant discrimination from all of society.

The Civil Rights Movement in the USA didn’t begin until the mid-1950s—a full twenty years after his death.

The reality is that we don’t know a lot about the Black experience during the early to mid-1900s. Much of this history wasn’t recorded by (white) historians. Instead, it was passed down through stories from parents to children, and so on. Only now are we starting to uncover and listen to the histories, stories, and experiences of Black Americans during this time period.

Remember how I mentioned at the start that I’m white as fuck? I don’t have grandparents I can go to and ask about the Black experience when they were children. First—my grandparents are all dead, and second—they were somehow whiter than I am. Their perspective wouldn’t help me because it isn’t my family’s story to tell.

What I can do is look at what we do know, listen to the voices of Black Americans who are finally being allowed to share their stories, and reflect that in my version of human Alastor. I can spend the time to research and learn. For instance, Alastor would have been ahead of his time—the first Black radio host was in 1929, a man named Jack L. Cooper from Chicago. He hosted the first Black-produced weekly variety show and showcased Black entertainers.

I can listen to stories of how mixed-race men were afforded the privilege of their lighter skin as long as they were useful to their white employers, only to be scapegoated the second anything went wrong. I do my best to reflect these stories in Human!Alastor's experiences and behaviors.

Why A White Coded Reader? I cannot even begin to hope to understand the Black American experience as it is now, let alone how it was in 1922, when MisD is set, or in the late 1910s, when my other Human Al fics take place. What I can understand on a deeper level is the white woman's experience, the experience of poverty, the experiences of abused women, and what it’s like to view the Black experience from the outside looking in.

And so that is what I try to highlight with my Human!Alastor fics. Yes, when I’m writing a Human!Alastor fic that deals with racial, class, and social politics as one of the themes to be explored (such as MisD), the reader is coded as white. It is through a white reader that I can have conversations with Alastor about why he feels he has to be perfect, why he straightens his hair, and so on. I cannot do proper justice to these feelings on a deeper level from a Black perspective because I can’t even begin to hope to understand it.

I cannot truly understand what Alastor’s Blackness would mean to him or how he would feel about being mixed. However, I can learn and understand how it impacted his life from the outside looking in. This is what I strive to do—to shed light on what Alastor’s accomplishments would have meant and how much his mistakes would have cost him.

I would love to see more Black writers in the fanfic space, especially within the Human!Alastor space. I would also love to see fewer readers written as blank slates. The Black experience in America and other white-dominated cultures is still not spotlighted often enough, both in present-day and historical settings.

These are stories that need to be told—perspectives that need to be explored, seen, and heard. However, they are not my stories to tell. Personally, until I am far better educated on the matter, I feel it would take away from these stories and be disrespectful to the lives of the very real people who lived them if I were to write from a perspective I cannot hope to understand.

I will continue to strive to write readers as racially neutral as often as the plot allows. However, I also ask that readers respect that, when the plot deals with racial, social, and class divides in a historical setting, if the reader is coming from a place of privilege, their skin tone is often the reason for such privilege.

Of course, I encourage readers to suspend disbelief and insert themselves into the fic regardless of their personal skin tone. I write from a historical setting, but as readers, you can imagine a set of historical laws or circumstances that allow for the same dynamics without requiring a white reader.

Can I do better? Absolutely—we all can. We’re always growing, improving, and learning. I was blessed to be raised in one of the most diverse places in the country (over 45 languages were spoken fluently at my high school). However, since leaving, I’ve struggled with the realities of having that bubble burst—not that Alaska was without racism.

I always welcome respectful discussions about the themes in MisD and all of my fics, as well as the reasons things may be portrayed the way they are. I prefer to write dark content, and with that comes the opportunity to educate and shine a light on topics many people avoid discussing. I simply ask for respect in return for the respect I give.

Much love, Kit

[wajjs]

to sum up SOME of the things happening in Argentina:

There's a nation wide manhunt for Loan, a toddler that disappeared in Corrientes (province that has borders with Paraguay, Brasil and Uruguay, three neighboring countries). Foul play has been suspected from day one. The family is believed to be involved by some people. The most popular on going theory is that he was sold to an international pedophile ring dedicated to buying kids from Latin American countries and selling them to people in power in the USA and aligned countries.

The court case connected to Tehuel, a trans young man that disappeared while going to a job opportunity he was offered by a local semi-political figure he was supposed to be able to trust, has been reopened. It is heavily theorized that this political figure, plus his partner and an accomplice, tortured and killed Tehuel for being trans. (There is a strong online theory that they fed him to the pigs after to get rid of his remains. Another popular theory is that they sold him to a human trafficking ring.)

The ex first lady, Fabiola Yañez, and ex president, Alberto Fernández, are in an ongoing legal battle after she was more or less forced to come forward and press charges against him for physical and psychological abuse. A lot of it was perpetrated while he was in office during the pandemic. He kept her locked up, isolated, and publicly blamed her for the things that went wrong during his presidential mandate. Unfortunately the media is having a field day with the pictures of Fabiola beaten up, basically showing off her bruised face and body while zooming in on the injuries. Fabiola had to come out and ask them to please stop showing those pictures as they are effectively re traumatizing her and her son.

Current president, Javier Milei, has effectively altered the employment contract law, taking away things that were meant to protect workers from corporate/employer greed and abuse. He has also effectively closed down the statal, official, ways to get in contact with authorities in case of gender based discrimination and abuse.

Current ruling political party (far right) is pushing forward a denial of facts and attempt at retelling our history by more or less saying that the last military dictatorship wasn't that bad, trying to pardon their sentences (even though the ones in charge of kidnapping, torturing, and disappearing people are living well while serving their sentences). A delegation met with one of the most heinous figure heads of the last dictatorship. A person from said delegation alleged it's old history and that people born during the 90s don't know and don't care about it.

[radfemfessing]

I hate how TRAs use black women as a smoking screen every time, without ever advocating for us, black women come out of their mouths only to say that since we are women , transwomen should be too. I never see them advocating for us concerning healthcare, the systemic violence we are subjected to from the men of our race or the racism and discrimination we face.

A black woman being called a man isn’t transphobia, it’s racism and misogyny. Seeing this pattern was the whole reason why I distanced myself. How can I show solidarity when this is the treatment I’m getting?

I find it so disrespectful given how the history of black women in America pretty much surrounds their sex, enslaved women were literally being experimented on (look up at the history of gynecology in the USA) and raped by slave owners! And it sure as hell didn’t happen because they “looked like men” it happened because they were female. The LGBTQ+ is riddled with misogyny and racism , but no one ever calls it out, as a bisexual black woman I feel alienated and I find the “queer” spaces, just a space full of white people who are blind to some of their privileges and who are quick to silence POC people when they express their concerns (not only the trans issues either , see how black gay men are treated for example).

Anyway, I don’t want to make this rant way too long.

🔆

[historicity-was-already-taken]

I'm trying to understand Snyder's work a bit better, could you help me with a sticking point? In the framework of fascism as "defining oneself in contrast to the Other," how is fascism differentiated from other forms of discrimination or totalitarianism?

My response here is based upon my own analyses of Snyder's work, my knowledge of history, and my presence at one of his talks. I claim no expertise in IR or political theory.

Lots of people can have bigoted views against an Other (discrimination), or accumulate power in an outsized manner (totalitarianism). But fascism, within Snyder's framework, is making that bigotry a central facet in the identity of a political entity.

Being racist doesn't make one inherently a fascist. Building a political party around the notion that whites have been displaced from their natural positions as leaders by the non-whites is.

Thinking Jews suck doesn't make one inherently a fascist. Building your nationalist party around the idea that Jews are an internal cancer which must be purged if the nation is to ever be truly free is.

Accumulating power and devising a form of socialism that each and every citizen is entitled to isn't fascism. Accumulating power and devising a form of socialism that each of every citizen is entitled to so long as each citizen's religion, politics, gender and sexual display, bloodlines, physicality, health, and ability are in keeping with what the ruling party believes defines the "nation" is.

Example 1: the party in question builds and defines itself in opposition to an Other. This example is referencing the political party embodied in the person of Donald Trump in the USA.

Example 2: the nationalist wing understands itself in contrast to an internal Other. This example is referencing a wide variety of Polish political parties which, even as Hitler was enacting genocidal policies against the Poles, still held that Hitler was, at least, helping them with their "Jewish problem."

Example 3: Is simply a description of National Socialism. Also known as Nationalsozialismus, or, Nazism.

Does that clarify things? Let me know if you need me to expand on this.

[miawashere]

the legal system is supposed to be a fair system- one that protects those who need i, brings justice to those who deserve it, and punish the wrongdoers of society. however, this is not the case. i’ve found that according to NSCL.org, Latinos & African Americans are 51% of the population in U.S. jails even though together they only account for roughly 30% of the U.S. population as a whole. this shows that people of color are treated unfairly in the U.S., and even though this isn’t surprising, something needs to be done about it.

[doyouevenknowwhatshappening]

You are, in fact, not a leftist or even left aligned if you do not support Jewish people and denounce anti-semetic behaviors when you see them.

You can not call yourself a leftist, an alternative person (such as punk, goth, etc), or call yourself anti-fascist if you do not stand up for Jewish Voices.

There is an actual rise in not-zees in the USA and even other places. This is usually a mind frame seen in the EXTREME right and MAGA crowd.

Know your dogwhistles.

Such as "Have a totally joyful day" or "lizard people control the government," as some of the more well known ones. Which are blatant calls for Jewish hate.

I am Goyim, I am not a Jewish person. I have no Jewish ancestors. However, I was taught about Jewish history in the most dumbed down way any kid can. Then I took it on myself (as you're supposed to do) to learn MORE. I have read about the past, both ancient and modern, of what jews have gone through. The amount of hatred, judgment, and fear these people experience is beyond me. For simply existing.

And before ANYONE begins to say anything about Palestine, I am 100% pro-palestine. I support the nation's right to exist peacefully, to have jurisdiction over their land, just the same as I support the right for Jewish people to have a safe place. The occupational control of the Palestinian people, the fact Hamas was created by Isreal, the fact that thousands are dying right now as I type this out; none of this is okay. What Isreal is doing, what Netanyahoo is doing, IS NOT OKAY. All of this has been caused by white nationalism, anti-semetism, and colonialism.

Jewish people as a whole, and Muslims, are NOT TO BLAME for the genocide happening in Palestine right now.

If you read the history, if you KNOW things before you scream them at the top of your lungs, you'd also know this. You'd know to blame Europe for what it has caused. You'd know to blame Anti-Semitism and the UK for "giving" Jewish people, Isreal. You'd know to blame the USA for getting involved in anything in the Middle East. You'd know that NEITHER THE JEWS OR PALESTINIANS WANT THIS.

Propaganda is two sides of the same danm coin people. Listen. Learn.

There are DEFINENTLY people doing things that are cruel, unjust, and horrifying to Palestinians. However, fear mongering has led people everywhere to believe, "Look what this one IDF soldier did/said!" Means "look, Jewish people ARE bad! Think of the children!"

The same way that many Israelis are being fed the same propaganda about Palestinians/Muslims as a whole. SINCE BEFORE OCTOBER 7TH.

Lies will and HAVE came from both sides. This doesn't mean that everything coming out of Palestine is false by ANY MEANS. But it does mean that fabrications to aid your opinions will always and have always been part of how wars have been fought.

People who scream for justice for Palestine while screaming at anyone for being Jewish and inciting hate against them are just as bad as the people supporting said Genocide.

You can acknowledge that what's happening to the Palestinian people is caused by a terrorist state. While also continue to fight against the hatred, misconceptions, discrimination, and fear of Jewish people worldwide. This is not about "picking sides" between Palestinians and Jewish people.

This is about liberation. Full stop.

This is about ending the tyrrany.

You can not be anti-war and yet celebrate when war is being fought. This is not a football game. This is not chess. These are lives.