I was reading about Randy Shultz, and it say he denied the results of his HIV test so it wouldn't seem like he was a biased source when "And the Band Played On" came out. Which is absolutely insane that he had to do that. Like him having the disease killing people might make his journalism less valid. It was revealed he knew earlier then 1987 anyway and had a collapsed lung a month or so before the book came out. Which makes sense, presumably health issues would have arose sooner than the book came out, and would die about a decade later.
But like. Homophobia & ableism & racism was rotting the brains of people so much, one of the biggest reports on the book might be considered null if the guy who wrote it had said he had the disease. Fucked up
2 notes
·
View notes
yk when i think about it, especially when im watching the anime with people who havent read the manga, the reason a lot of people who only watch the anime and didnt read the manga misinterpreted saikis character so badly is definitely in part because of how damn fast paced the anime is 😭
like that little smile and eye shine frame is there for not even half a second in the anime, so its easier to miss it and assume that he really did only finish those workbooks to get coffee jelly ☠️ its much more clear if you get a good look at how he reacts here that hes just a silly little tsundere and a fucking liar
243 notes
·
View notes
amab and afab, if they were used as shorthand for the actual full phrases that they signify, with emphasis on the "assigned" part, and an understanding that they are enforcements of normative (ie, dyadic and cisgender and binary) sex, would be like. really useful. but people took the terms and started using them as shorthand FOR normative sex instead of the ENFORCEMENT OF normative sex. so when other trans people (almost always dyadic trans people) ask for your agab they are almost always asking for your Original Genital Situation. your starting point, so to say. and the reason FOR asking is also almost always bc they are trying to also enforce a certain kind of normativity within queer spaces (which is stupid bc being queer is inherently non-normative but here we are). like, you cant be a lesbian if you're ftm, bc you ARE m, so if you ARE a lesbian, then that means you're lying about some aspect of your identity. does that make sense?
it is always always always incredibly.... i do not trust dyadic trans people that use cagab terms, even moreso than i do not trust dyadic trans people that just use agab terms. agab is also coopted intersex language, but the "coercive" part of cagab SPECIFICALLY refers to medical "intervention" of intersex characteristics, such as "corrective" surgeries and hrt. i am deeply fucking suspicious of any dyadic trans person that uses those terms exactly the same as described above, even moreso if they do so bc "all gender is coercive".
like. yeah. that's true. but you use these terms to erase and overtake intersex discussions on the medical abuse of intersex infants. and i cant help but wonder why you would feel the need to do that.
80 notes
·
View notes
was thinkin again about how 47 wears Lucas's coat during the mission in Berlin, so I had to draw a quick sketch to try and capture the somber and complicated emotions that I imagine 47 was feeling at that time ;n; losing a brother that he was just starting to get to know all over again must've been so difficult, gosh;;
please do not repost.
also on deviantart
38 notes
·
View notes
hearing any defense of the huskerdust age gap (as if it needs one) that doesn't start and end with “Angel is, by every metric under the sun, an adult who can make his own decisions” is fucking insane to me. You do not need to pull out a timeline. No math required. He is in his thirties. Fuck, I am younger than him by a considerable amount, and if I could be bothered to get out of my pyjamas and go cruise at the local septuagenarian biker bar, all things made equal, I would be fucking fine. Me and this hypothetical grandpa trick would be equally consenting adults.
It is just a bit frustrating to see this line of argument in EITHER direction, from people who think that a ~thirty years old cannot possibly want GILF pussy or that think you need to corkboard mathletes a way around the age gap by saying “well actually they're around the same age if you [blah blah blah]”. There are things that are actually fucked up about them that we COULD be talking about instead of putting Seattle on blast with this “how could a seventy year old man ethically start a relationship with another fully grown adult, both of whom are trying to make meaningful connections in their lives, beyond their work?”
Please keep in mind, none of this is that serious. This is, at the end of the day, a very silly discourse, and this is, at the end of the day, a very silly reaction. I wish the septuagenarian biker bar thing was serious, but alas. I live in a boring area.
61 notes
·
View notes
"The newly widowed Elizabeth (Woodville) was exceptionally vulnerable. Several of the trustees responsible for her jointure refused to hand over the manors that were meant to sustain her in her widowhood. Moreover, her brother-in-law, Edward Grey, had seized estates that her son Thomas should have inherited from his paternal grandfather, while her mother-in-law’s new young husband, Sir John Bourchier, had prevailed on Lady Ferrers to settle her principal properties on them jointly for life, ensuring that Thomas would have to wait far longer for this inheritance too. Rivers and Scales were pardoned in July 1461 and swiftly moved into the Yorkist establishment, which perhaps explains the success of the chancery suits Elizabeth launched to regain her jointure. Her son’s inheritance proved harder to recover. By 1463, Rivers was often in (Edward IV's) company and on his council, but Elizabeth needed someone with much stronger influence over the King. She turned to a distant kinsman, William, Lord Hastings, the King’s chamberlain. Hastings drove a very hard bargain for his aid but it was probably amid these negotiations that the King’s desire for Elizabeth was kindled."
-J.L. Laynesmith, "Elizabeth Woodville: the Knight's Widow", Later Plantagenet and Wars of the Roses Consorts: Power, Influence, and Dynasty
39 notes
·
View notes
More thinking about the Jonder (Jon Gender). I imagine Jon discovering it/its pronouns and just being Drawn to them. Jon meets somebody who goes by it/its and can’t stop thinking about it (pun intented) but can never work up the courage to admit it even to themselves so they use they/them in their head or with close friends (read: Georgie) and he/him everywhere else. By the time Jon is ready to use it/its for itself it’s already at the Magnus Institute, a place where they feel a constant need to come off as Professionally As Possible and nobody ELSE is using Neopronouns (for the same reasons as Jon, although it doesn’t know that) and is it even safe to be out as any shade of queer at all so it continues with business as usual pronoun-wise. And then it discovers that it’s turning into an eldritch inhuman monster and its gender feelings get 5000% more complicated.
27 notes
·
View notes
When I think about Minkowski, Eiffel, Hera and Lovelace post-canon, the relationship I imagine is something that could be described as a group queerplatonic relationship. As I like to think about it (and other people are obviously entirely free to think about it differently), the relationships are entirely platonic, but they prioritise each other, they take care of each other, they live together (although with a fair amount of individual comings and goings), and they are the most important people in each other's lives. External people tend to wonder who is dating who in that house and are surprised to learn that no one is. But I don't think they'd feel the need for a term like QPR. I don't think they'd be searching for that language to describe their dynamic to the world or to each other.
Of course, I also think of them under the term 'found family', but I'm not sure they'd use familial language either. I think they'd leave that unspoken. And words like 'friends' and 'housemates' - while true - don't fully capture who they are to each other.
In fact, when I'm thinking about how they describe their relationships to each other post-canon, the word that I keep coming back to is that they are a crew.
They are still a crew post-canon. But "crew" means something different now that the station is gone. "Crew" had already started to mean something different while they were up there. (See this post.) It's a choice now. It had already started to be a choice while they were up there. Once, "crew" described their shared relationship to the Hephaestus. Now it only describes their relationships to each other.
I think Minkowski definitely still calls them "her crew". And the others end up doing so too, although perhaps to a lesser extent. Sometimes it's in a casual or joking way: talking about"Crew Movie Nights", or despairing "Does no one else in this crew know how to load the dishwasher?" Sometimes it's in a purely internal way: thinking "I ought to head home - the crew will be wondering where I've got to", or ranking "Keeping my crew safe" at the top of a mental list of priorities. Sometimes it's in a serious way: asserting "I won't let the crew down", or saying "You'll always be a part of this crew" as an act of reassurance in moments of doubt and fear.
And when they call each other a crew, it means family and commitment and love and responsibility and trust and care. It means all those things that Goddard Futuristics didn't care about when it gave them that word.
There's a kind of reclamation in that, in turning a piece of that military language into something different and beautiful outside of that context, in knowing "The mission was a lie, the station was a deathtrap, but some of the people I met up there are my people now."
112 notes
·
View notes