#it’s historically A QUEER COLOR TO THE POINT

[paraphwrites]

a brief note about charles rowland, bisexuality, & the art of queer interpretation

for most of modern history, queer people have been cast to the shadows. be they jailed at the time for sodomy, or erased from history after the fact by historians downplaying their relationships, history has been notoriously cruel to queer people. this is especially true in media, which often completely ignored the existence of queer people.

from this lack of representation, the 'queer interpretation' was born. this is when a consumer notices subtext in a piece of media and extrapolates that one or more character(s) is queer. this is especially prominent to try and undo historical revisionism, and what authors may not have been able to publish at the time, but were able to imply.

a well-known example is "a picture of dorian gray," an egregiously homosexual novel, written by an egregiously homosexual man. despite dorian not being explicitly gay.....he is. this is widely accepted among modern interpretations, because wilde utilizes queer-coding and allusions to ancient greece to create subtext that the character is homosexual in nature.

however, not everyone is a fan of the queer interpretation. many people cite it as inserting gayness where it does not belong. this, though an understandable argument, both erases the history of queer people and the ways that authors intentionally queer-coded their characters, and misses the point of art all together. art is open for interpretation, whether it be the symbolism of the curtain color, or the character's sexuality.

but the queer interpretation is especially important because it gives voices to those expressly forbidden to share queer thoughts when they were alive. beyond giving a voice to the author, it also reflects the feelings of the person interpreting the text (as all interpretations do). the degree to which one utilizes the queer interpretation illustrates the degree to which one feels the need to do so. for example, someone who is searching for queer rep is more likely to read charles rowland as gay, whereas someone who isn't fond of headcanons is more likely to accept him as straight

now, is charles rowland bisexual? yes. and also no.

charles rowland does exhibit many characteristics which, when you are familiar with queer-coding, may make him seem like a glaringly bisexual man. he wears earrings, he dresses alternatively, he smirks, he is an absolute twink. but, straight men can smirk too, and wear earrings, and dress punk rock. that does not actually mean anything. BUT it DOES. when utilizing the queer interpretations, one analyzes fashion and diction and other pieces of subtext to draw a conclusion. the implied subtext is queerness. so, charles rowland is bisexual, then, right?

limiting bisexuality to stating your attraction to both men & woman is harmful. it reinforces that heterosexuality is the norm, and implies that, if you do not directly state that you are bisexual, then you are straight.

but, there is merit to the 'charles is straight' argument. it isn't homophobic to not use the queer interoperation.

dbda is a show that is clearly not ashamed of highlighting queer characters. so it stands to reason that if charles is queer, it would have been brought up. (of course, if there had been a season two, maybe we would have seen him discuss his sexuality, but i will work with the source material i have.) so, it stands to reason that charles is straight. afterall, despite faint subtext that charles is straight, the show does not go out of its way to queercode him. so, charles is straight

WRONG AGAIN. charles rowland is neither gay nor straight, he is a plot device in this mini essay.

the heart of the queer interpretation is seeing a character and looking beyond what is written. oftentimes, it involves two characters (eg, edwin & charles). in the instances when there are two, the queer interpretation asks that you look at the most important relationship in the story, rather than what may seem to be the love story.

you may ship catwin, or crystalXcharles, or whatever. and that is totally valid. BUT, the show could still exist without the cat king x edwin. and the show could still totally exist without crystal x charles. but the show immediately falls apart without the relationship between charles & edwin. whether romantic or not, their relationship is the heart of the story. it is a story about THOSE TWO and everyone else is add on. i am not saying no one else is important, but i am saying the heart & foundation of the story is derived from edwin & charles.

queer interpretors ask that you look at the most important relationship in a text, rather than the most explicitly romantic one. and, often, queer interpretors then project romantic feelings onto the two characters that the story could not survive without.

crystal & charles cannot end up together because crystal will never be the most important person in the world to charles. the cat king & edwin can never end up together because the cat king will never be the most important person in the world to edwin. ergo, edwin and charles will inevitably end up together, because they are the most important people to each other.

at least, that's what queer theory might argue about it.

another just as valid argument is that charles rowland is a bisexual, and not in love with edwin. and a third valid argument is that charles rowland isn't bisexual and isn't in love with edwin.

because we don't KNOW. this is interpretation. so i can look at charles rowland and say 'he's a bisexual and he loves edwin.' and you can look at charles and say 'he is straight.' and someone else can say 'he is aromantic' and someone else that he's pansexual and someone else that he needs way more therapy before he can even begin contemplating his sexuality. and they are all VALID.

anyway but i think it's important to understand the why behind why so many people think charles' is bi, and why it matters! i'm not saying charles has to be bisexual, but i'm saying the bisexual interpretation does matter.

[jesncin]

Re: the whole Si Spurrier Bi/Pan Johnstantine debacle thing

For context, Spurrier (the writer of the current Hellblazer run) explicitly had John self identify as pansexual in narration despite John being canonically bisexual. The cover of the issue (I believe this was the artist's intention, but can't confirm) also evoked the bi flag colors in its colorscheme. When asked about this on twidder, Spurrier doubled down (paraphrasing: "John shouldn't have any queer label, he's bad representation"), deleted tweets, and just left fans in a mess.

My tldr take: John Constantine is bisexual. Spurrier didn't and doesn't know the difference between bi and pan, mixed them up and spouted respectability nonsense to cover himself. He's an old man who doesn't fyuck with gay people, simply. I don't think he has deep seated hatred for the bi community or anything. He made a mistake (still a bad one) and didn't apologize for it. Shame this is the author spearheading such a prominent queer character.

The long take:

I see a lot of people bringing up modern media that reaffirms John's bisexuality but I believe it's important to look at the historical context.

John Constantine in his original Vertigo Hellblazer run was an inherently counter-culture character. A working class guy growing up in the punk scene, aligning himself with queer people, explicitly ACAB, a rebuttal to the classic Superhero tropes, etc. It's only fitting that Constantine's bisexuality was revealed in a similarly counter-culture manner. Under guest writer John Smith (and artist Sean Phillips and colorist Tom Zuiko), John just casually mentions having "the odd boyfriend" in passing narration about his struggles with commitment. This may not seem like a big deal with today's standards, but it's important to recognize that this issue came out in 1992. Hellblazer already had a handful of queer characters at this point and suddenly after years of queer coding, the main character just reveals his bisexuality in passing.

So that's the historical context in our comics world, how about within the canon of Hellblazer? Well, John was born in 1953 in Liverpool, meaning he was a teen in the 60s, formed and toured with Mucous Membrane all over the UK but mostly London during the 70s (as a young man in his 20s). When we cross reference that with what's going on in the UK queer scene at this time, it's no wonder why John is presumed to be bisexual.

[From Stonewall UK]

In the same article, Stonewall mentions that the term "pansexual" became popular in the 90s. While this aligns with when issue #51 reveals Constantine's "odd boyfriend" comment, it's clear that the term "bisexual" would be the term Constantine grew up with during his formative years. While this distinction might seem unnecessary or even arbitrary to some people, these identities do matter in their nuance and historical context. Identities and histories are not interchangeable after all. With all this context in mind, to me, John Constantine will always be bisexual.

To Spurrier's comment on "John Constantine shouldn't have any label anyway, he's bad representation/role model for any identity" (paraphrasing, I know he probably said this in a defensive moment since if he truly believed this then he wouldn't have explicitly had Constantine refer to himself as pansexual in Dead in America #7), I think using respectability in defense of a character as counter-culture as Constantine is a demonstrable example of Missing The Dang Point.

[from Nerdist article written by Jules Greene]

Spurrier, the gays like John Constantine especially in his og Hellblazer run because he wasn't a walking Pride ad. We like that he's a mess. We like that he's working class. We like that he's messed up and painfully human. If you don't understand that about Constantine, then you fundamentally misunderstand why people find him so appealing to begin with.

[respectthepetty]

10 Anticipated BLs for 2024

Since I'm excited for ALL the GLs (Pluto, 23.5, Sunshine in the Wind, Chaser Game, Be Mine, y todo!), I'm making my list of the 10 BLs I'm excited for this year with brief reasons why I'm looking forward to them. In my normal fashion, I cheat my way into having more. All except one is Thai because Thailand loves to tease series three years in advance, then never make them, but I strongly believe these are coming:

The Next Prince

Zee continues to never play a poor person, and a trailer is supposed to drop in the first quarter of this year. I never knew there was so many fencers on BL Tumblr, so I'm looking forward to everyone's commentary on how well the characters poke with their sticks or whatever fencers do.

Jack & Joker: U Steal My Heart

It's a heist BL. It has YinWar. It has Prom x Mark. It has Bonz. It's Dee Hup House (we got beef). It's Director Tee and probably Cinematographer Jim. It might have color coding. There is not one thing I can find wrong with this series. It's perfect on paper, and I'm praying that translates well to the screen.

Spare Me Your Mercy

Like that lady in Titanic, I've been waiting 80 years for this series (give me a minute to cry about MaxTul), and it's finally near! I'm getting JJ & Tor in a Dr. Sammon piece, who I feel writes "Be Gay, Do Crime" very well, so I'll be forgiving any of these two gays' wrongs including murder, attempted murder, contemplating murder, and murdering each other in the bedroom (ahhhh!).

Wandee Goodday

Golf from The Eclipse is directing. It's about Muay Thai. It has an older doctor and a younger boxer who start off as bed friends (and I think one is actually a virgin). It has color coding. It has me already seated and waiting with popcorn, and I think it might be the first offering that will be delivered from GMMTV's 2024 lineup.

Sequels: Choco Milk Shake 2, Unintentional Love Story 2, My Doctor

Is Choco Milk Shake 2 gonna finally give me poly? Probably not, but I hope My Doctor brings the same heat the side couple did in Be Mine, Superstar, and the side couple getting the spotlight in Unintentional Love Story 2 will also make my side-couple-supremacy heart very happy this year.

Live in Love

It looks color coded. That's it. That's the reason. Keeping my expectations low because it might not get made since this is Thailand's favorite game.

Red Peafowl

The character reveals were absolute chaos, so I'm hoping that chaos transfers over to the actual series because it can either be a mess or a masterpiece, but it cannot be mediocre with Max, Cooheart, Boun, Mek, and Yacht as supports. Plus, it has color coding and a bird that is quickly becoming a Tumblr god.

Love Upon a Time

Even though it is a historical queer series, which means it could be sad, I think Domundi will keep the sass, so James' character won't be crying in the 1600s club but instead eating fruit seductively to encourage Net's character to put his homosexual skills into practice instead of simply theorizing about them, which is something I need more of. Plus, it has color coding.

Love Puzzle

This is one that might not get made because . . . Thailand. It's connected to Chains of Heart, but I don't care because the cast looks good and Poppy is gonna finally get to kiss a homie. If this doesn't get made, I will cry thug tears. It's 2024. Poppy deserves to kiss a man already.

My Stand-In

I don't understand the plot, but it doesn't matter because Pepzi and Khom are directing, and in case that means nothing, those were KinnPorsche's directors! Then, it has Up and Poom as the leads, plus a stacked supporting cast. I'm here. I'm queer. And I'm ready to be served.

Honorable Mention: Peaceful Property

It's about los espookys and features Tay and New. Will it be a QL? The streets are saying no, but all the characters are color coded, and all's I'm saying is what would be the point of color coding them if I ain't getting a BL main couple and a GL side couple? It's already canon to me.

Bonus: MosBank & JoongDunk

MosBank had like eighty projects announced for 2023, and I got NONE! Big Dragon 2, Big Dragon: The Movie, SunsetxVibes, where you at?! Y Journey: Stay Like a Local and Club Friday do not count. I don't want to watch their horror movie, but gosh darnit, if that comes out before everything else, I just might.

And I am a JoongDunk fan first, and a human second. Give my boys a gym BL already, GMMTV!

[cordycepsfem]

Today in: “Pride isn’t for gay people anymore”: I went to the website for the Pride event in the big city near me. You’ll never guess what I found.

We acknowledge and honor that the Stonewall Riots, the historical origin of Pride, were in response to police harassment of LGBTQ+ people, especially those who were trans, nonbinary, and people of color.

That sounds super incorrect. For one thing:

�� so no, there were not a bunch of heckin’ cool smol bean enbies at the Stonewall Riots. There weren’t really any trans people as we understand trans today - they were transsexuals, so they were also usually gay.

For another thing: it was not solely in commemoration of the Riots. Pride was also a demonstration for equal rights.

But let’s see who Boston thinks Pride is for now:

“Memorialize the queer, trans, Black, Indigenous, and People of Color…, activists at the forefront of the 20th century lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual, plus… movement.”

So we can’t, by this standard, memorialize Brenda Howard. She’s called the Mother of Pride, but she was white and Jewish and didn’t call herself queer. She was very outspoken about being bisexual.

Or any of the other founders of Pride, who were also white, and half lesbian, half gay men. Some are still alive, so I get not being able to “memorialize” them, but really, you can’t spare a breath for them?

How about Barbara Gittings, described as “the mother of the LGBT civil rights movement”? She’s dead, but again, she’s white, and she was a lesbian, not “queer.”

Or Edie Windsor and Thea Spyer?

How about Gilbert Baker, who sewed the first rainbow pride flag and said it covered everyone? It didn’t need to be subsumed by every niche demographic, it was for all of us.

Who are these mysterious QTBIPOC who seem to have done all the heavy lifting, to the point where they’re being fetishized and commemorated at a massive Pride event like Boston’s? Why don’t we know their names? Who are the few intersex individuals who don’t mind being callously lumped in with a group who uses them as a “gotcha”?

The names that come to mind when I think of today’s activism include Eli Erlick (confirmed rapist), Chase Strangio (fights in court so boys can change with girls and play in their sports and children can receive net negative life-altering drugs and surgical procedures), Elliot Page (poster boy for sadness), Dylan Mulvaney (he thinks he knows what a woman is), Erin Reed (scare-mongering nutjob who can’t read a legal bill to save his life)… and then I’m out. Who else falls into this stunning and brave category?

Also, anyone find it a little unpleasant that these “queer” people have now superseded the “LGB” people mentioned as an afterthought in the second part of the paragraph?

Whoever this Pride’s for, it’s not for LGB people anymore.

[theygotbitchesinmedia]

okay so here is her review: https://arkadymartine.wordpress.com/2015/09/27/the-traitor-baru-cormorant-a-reviewresponse/

admittedly its from 2015- i haven't poked around to see how she may have changed how she feels about it, and i know she did blurb seth's recent scifi novel (Exordia), so there's no bad blood there or anything. it's also a positive review, in general- she ends with this sentence: "I highly, highly recommend this book; I have not thought so much about something I read in a long time."

i am also coming into this as someone who has read all of seth dickinson's work for the game destiny, where he was near-singlehandedly responsible for a good oh… 80% of the interesting women (& overall interesting concepts lol!) in the game, and his writing of one of those characters in particular as a complex and flawed character got him bullied viciously off of all social media. if you've tried to find his social media presence and havent found anything, that's why. so i mayhaps have a little more emotion in the game.

THAT SAID. here are some specific parts from her review i find really fucking annoying! and color the way i feel about Memory & Desolation, despite them being so incredibly targeted at me as a classics person AND someone who fucking loves the specific sub-genre of scifi her novels are.

"[Traitor] asks a question which I find compelling as a student of an empire and as a queer woman. That question is: what do we gain by complicity? What do we – we barbaroi, we women, we queer people, we imperialized – what do we get when we say yes? When we say yes I will hide my true nature? When we say yes I will subsume myself into the beautiful machine? When we say can we speak English? Or the literature I love just happens to be written by straight white men – and mean it, too, mean it with the kind of depthless love that a person can have for a text that speaks to them, which holds up a mirror to them?"

i dont think the use of the greek word for barbarian does anything here (she also keeps coming back to the greek term orthos in her review, which also pisses me off lol), i dont think empire is a "beautiful machine," and i don't think the invocation of identity politics is useful. like. i know she's a byzantine scholar but if your first association with empire is purely a finite Historical Empire instead of, like, modern US imperialism, or British colonialism, you are going into this discussion with a certain set of values and opinions! a set of values and opinions that let you call an empire a "beautiful machine" in all earnestness. this claim probably seems unsubstantiated and nitpicky now just from this excerpt but ill come back to it with more i promise. on the idpol front, she also says immediately after this that she does believe that straight people can and should write queer people, but that they should listen to queer people when they point out those errors. she then continues:

"But then, critique: there are two points on which I think Dickinson’s portrayal of a queer protagonist has faltered, and I think both of these errors arise from the fact that he isn’t part of – as far as I know at the time of writing this review – a queer community. Firstly, I disbelieve Baru’s awareness of her own desires… …For the first portion of the book, her queerness felt more like a character trait assigned to her for reason of plot than a naturally built part of her as a person… Secondly, I wonder where queer people in Falcrest are…"

theres more to these excerpts, but. i personally didnt find the depiction of baru's desire to be unrealistic, and also this was a review of Traitor, specifically, so where on earth would baru have heard about queer people in falcrest? and more importantly, why should we care so much about queer people in the imperial core? moreover i think the way seth does it with svir is very very well done, and illustrates the hypocrisy of empire in a way that does NOT seem like what martine is asking for here!!!

"Why am I invested? I myself am a student of empire. I’m a Byzantinist. My academic work is about empire and its seductions; it is the animating principle of my professional life. And: I am myself someone who loves order over disorder. Who looks for systems in all things. Who is comforted by structures; who is concerned deeply with propriety. But here’s my real criticism of this book: I don’t buy the seduction of the Masquerade. And I think if this book fails, it’s there: in that its empire is too easily read as undesirable. As profane, unethical, fundamentally wrong. It is really overtly evil." … "The Masquerade isn’t civilized. It’s civilization, but I don’t recognize it as civilized, and this is a problem with a constructed empire. An empire relies on itself as the definition of civilization – I would footnote here Ann Leckie’s Imperial Radch as a SFnal example of an empire which is built on this principle, and which, for this reader at least, achieves the facsimile. (But then my ancestors were not enslaved, we were exterminated; not annexed, but exiled. Perhaps I like the Radch better than the Masquerade because I can find a place for myself in it, and cannot imagine a place within the Masquerade someone like me would ever be safe –)"

and THIS. THIS RIGHT HERE IS MY BIGGEST PROBLEM. critiquing the masquerade as not "seductive" enough, calling it too evil to have people join it- how does someone miss the point THIS badly??? like. are you FUCKING serious??? how do you read a book about the immense violence of colonialism and your problem is that it is boohoo too violent for people to join willingly. google literally fucking anything the US has done ever!!! and the invocation of the concept of "civilized" as an objective quality, despite the recognition that the empire constructs what counts as "civilization" is so fucking unserious/simplistic/juvenile! why do you need to imagine yourself a place in the empire? in the imperial core specifically!

and i think this particular approach bleeds into her books. i read them at Least 2 years ago, so this is mostly vibes-based, and i will avoid spoilers.

there is such a focus on the allure of the imperial core, on the "beautiful machine" of the empire as she calls it. there is violence done, but it is abstracted away from the wealth of the imperial core. there are no economics there. the empire sees her independent station as a backwater, and there is some cultural tensions there, but there is no realistic violence and exploitation! it is not clear at all what maintains the empire, besides some abstract idea of trade. i also don't know what her Point is with the naming & language conventions, which are very clearly inspired in part by ancient Mayan- e.g. the empire and core planet are called Teixcalaan. and idk this may be reductive of me but i think if you are going to pull features from civilizations that have been colonized and use them to inspire fictional colonizing forces, you ARE saying something there! idk! and like, the ancient Mayan

and on the ~representation~ front, i also don't think she does a better job than seth tbqh!!! i felt like the characters getting together came out of nowhere and felt anticlimactic- there is also not the tension i think there should be with the main character being an ambassador-ish and the love interest being… idr. junior intelligence officer iirc? idk! and for all her critique of baru's desire for women not feeling "real" or present enough, i do not remember the main character in Memory having any real focus on it!

i enjoyed Memory just fine, but i don't think it says anything interesting or novel or even critical about empire, and i found her review of Traitor extremely shallow and useless, if very revealing about her own outlook on empire lol!!!

this has been at best Minorly proofread and edited but im not like, writing an academic essay on the matter and so i apologize for any inconsistencies.

oh man thanks for this this is really interesting. i went and read the whole thing and i agree a ton with your critique. i'm going to stick my thoughts below the cut because i went on for a bit here, in typical fashion.

i personally didnt find the depiction of baru's desire to be unrealistic, and also this was a review of Traitor, specifically, so where on earth would baru have heard about queer people in falcrest? and more importantly, why should we care so much about queer people in the imperial core?

NO BUT EXACTLY... for starters this is explicitly a novel about colonized people taking place in a colony where none of the major characters are from the empire. where, when, and how would we take the time to explore what queerness looks like for them and more importantly, like you've asked, why the hell should that be a priority for the narrative in this case.

in terms of 'i found this to be an unrealistic depiction of queer desire' 9/10 times i feel like what that means is 'i found this to be an unrelatable depiction' which is an entirely different critique. i know i'm working with two additional books worth of context that martine isn't working with here. but even taking into account just the characterization we have for baru in traitor i think this is suuuuch an unfair complaint. i'm gonna pull the entire quote she says about baru's sexuality here because i have additional specific gripes with it.

Firstly, I disbelieve Baru’s awareness of her own desires. In the first portion of the book, I do not ever feel the weight of Baru’s own awareness of her sexuality; there is an absence of carnality, a kind of intellectual version of lesbian desire which is, to me, inconsistent with the sort of desire I expect. Not until the introduction of Baru’s eventual lover Tain Hu do I get a sense of Baru as a woman who loves women. Further, considering how very much the Empire of Masks and Increastic philosophy criminalizes the sin of queer desire, I wish Baru had struggled more with the nature of her desire. For the first portion of the book, her queerness felt more like a character trait assigned to her for reason of plot than a naturally built part of her as a person. This markedly improved in the second half, where Baru notices women in a way she does not notice men.

For starters, it is insanely hypocritical to me to complain that her desire both isn't carnal enough and she processes it too intellectually, but that she isn't struggling enough with it. Baru intellectually processes things! That's her entire character from the getgo! She also has a difficult time conceptualizing other people as fully realized beings with their own agency. These character traits paired together don't make for a particularly passionate and carnal relationship to her sexuality. She is also, at her absolute oldest in this book, 21! (Or 22? I can't remember. I know she spends 3 years in aurdwynn) and has spent her entire youth being groomed to be a scholar. Of course detached intellectualism is her primary way of navigating all things. Why wouldn't it be?

Baru primary motivation is to save taranoke, she wants to save the taranoki way of life, and part of that way of life includes an acceptance of nonhetero nonmonogamous relationships. Sure, a different character arc may have involved baru actually internalizing and then having to break free of the trappings of race, gender, and sexuality that the empire tries to impose upon its citizens. but that's not baru and acting like this is a writing flaw rather than a character choice is insane to me.

There's absolutely no reason for Baru to lie awake at night pontificating about how wrong and dirty of her it is to want to have sex with women because we are never lead to believe even for a minute that Baru puts any emotional weight in incrasticism. She doesn't conceptualize it as sinful she conceptualizes it as illegal!

And "Not until the introduction of Baru’s eventual lover Tain Hu do I get a sense of Baru as a woman who loves women. " is killing me in particular because like. Yeah. Tain Hu is baru's first love. thats the point. But beyond that this is just not being able to see anything other than what she's looking for because i think the chapters covering baru's childhood make it pretty clear that her feelings for aminata and cousin lao (im not double checking the name but im pretty sure it was this) are deep and strong. the fact that they're not as explicitly and straightforwardly romantic and sexual as her relationship with tain hu doesn't change that, and in fact, points to baru's struggle with/development of her sexuality that she claims was somehow missing in this book.

like i just simply can't see anything here but someone who is seeing an emotional landscape they can't relate to and assuming that means it's flawed writing. skill issue frankly.

She's also fucking insane for acting like the masquerade is too cartoonishly evil to be appealing. once again im going to post her full quote here because i think its important to see

its empire is too easily read as undesirable. As profane, unethical, fundamentally wrong. It is really overtly evil. It punishes sexual “deviants” with mutilation and death. It murders children callously. It inflicts plague and withholds vaccines. It lobotomizes its own emperors for the sake of convincing its populace that the emperor is just. Most of all, the Masquerade is a eugenicist empire: it is explicitly founded on not purity of bloodline but on purification of bloodline, on making people useful to it. It makes people: it breeds them carefully, it indoctrinates them through schools, it uses drugs and operant conditioning to transform their minds and make them into automata tools. It commits every atrocity that a modern Western reader recognizes as abhorrent. This is a problem. It is a problem because we are asked, as readers, to believe that there are reasons besides blackmail that a person would willingly become an agent of the Masquerade. We are asked to imagine that the Masquerade is a beautiful machine.

for starters. "It commits every atrocity that a modern Western reader recognizes as abhorrent." MODERN WESTERN EMPIRES DID, AND OCCASIONALLY STILL DO, MOST OF THESE THINGS!!! THIS IS US! WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!!! I FEEL INSANE!!!!

I think the book makes it more than explicitly clear why the empire is appealing??? it has all of the capital???? its building schools and sewage systems and importing food and goods and teaching reading and writing??? baru's own internal narrative often shows her own strife at the fact that the empire has made genuinely incredible scientific advancements that offer significant improvements in quality of life to many, many people. martine actually acknowledges this in the next paragraph of her review, and then brushes it away as not being good enough. why? what about that doesn't convince you?

she is seeming to hugely ignore the fact that in the case of aurdwynn specifically, the bureaucracy of the empire is coming in to unseat feudal aristocracy! what the masquerade offers may not be particularly tempting to most of that ruling class, but its economic opportunities are more then believably appealing to the common people. i think this is made pretty clear when baru's ploy to use the fiat bank to make loans to the aurdwynni people and basically lessen the massive tax burdens from the duchies wins her huge favor with the public.

and frankly even for the ruling class the potential economic benefits are massive too if you're willing to participate in the empire properly. yes the empire doesn't have Moral appeal. it doesn't fucking have to. it owns pretty much every economy outside of the oriati mbo. the fact that that's not enough for her is as you've pointed out really really showing her biases and blind spots. 'no reason besides blackmail' MONEY!!!! MONEY! IT'S MONEY! THIS IS A BOOK ABOUT ACCOUNTING! HOW DID YOU MISS THAT!!!

and the invocation of the concept of "civilized" as an objective quality, despite the recognition that the empire constructs what counts as "civilization" is so fucking unserious/simplistic/juvenile! why do you need to imagine yourself a place in the empire? in the imperial core specifically!

And this is really it for me too, yeah. It's gross. It's absolutely gross. "An empire isn't believably appealing unless I, personally, find it appealing" there are people alive who are eugenicists, who love community policing, who believe in race science. the masquerade is an empire for them. the thing about empires is that they are only actually empowering for an incredibly small subset of people, and the fact that You, Specifically, Arkady Martine can't imagine being one of those people in this instance doesn't make it not believable. This is a shatteringly individualist way of engaging with a work.

As for your points about the way she handles empire in her own book obviously i can't have anything to say there because i haven't read it yet, but i do absolutely agree with you on this bit:

and idk this may be reductive of me but i think if you are going to pull features from civilizations that have been colonized and use them to inspire fictional colonizing forces, you ARE saying something there! idk! and like, the ancient Mayan

1000% i don't think this is reductive of you. whether or not you're consciously saying anything is one question but it's a choice that absolutely doesn't exist in a vacuum. out of curiosity i googled her to see if she was of mayan descent or anything and maybe she chose that due to some personal ties to the subject matter but she doesn't seem to be. which of course i don't think means she can't or shouldn't draw any inspiration from there but i do think all of these sorts of choices are meaningful

i don't really have much to say here to round off a conclusion but. wow. deeply deeply telling review that does not particularly make me want to read anything she has written beyond this.

[iwanthermidnightz]

not taylor nation deliberately drawing attention to the violets in the portrait, which are a known symbol of sapphic love

the violets in this picture aren’t talked about enough. what’s funny is I legit started reading this book yesterday called vampires and violets. not even lying. and the introduction on the first page explains the history behind sapphics using violets. marlene dietrich (who i’ve made several posts on) is on the cover dressed in a men’s suit. she is one of the most notorious sapphics of hollywood.

a little tidbit, in the movie morocco. marlene plucks a flower from a woman’s hair, smells it and then makes history by kissing her in one of the first wlw displays of affection in a movie, let alone in a suit made for a man.

these two pages are a must read because it so importantly points out why queer coding exists, how invisibility can foster visibility as well, and how historically we have used and looked for queer coding to find others like ourselves and to affirm our identities.

especially when any traces of us are being purposefully repressed, even erased to push heterosexual narratives to the forefront. we had to find a way to been seen… to be visible to each other. this specific part:

“The color ultraviolet, like most of lesbian history, is located just beyond the visible spectrum. Violet, as a sign of love between women, serves as an indicator of what lies beyond the visible spectrum and as a means by which to become visible to each other.”

so I can’t wait to continue reading this book. it’s a very validating and informative read! may we all continue keep our history alive 💜🪻

[biceratops7]

So here’s the thing,

Being visibly queer to the point of ostracism is historically synonymous with gender nonconformity and I don’t think that’s a conversation some are ready to have.

Gender nonconformity as it pertains to Stede is a hot button topic of debate in the fandom rn, and I love that! So much! Queer theory shit is in right now? Sign me tf up! But I see a lot of posts answering “no” to “does Stede wear feminine clothing?” as if it’s the same question. It’s also being talked about as a binary “to be” or “not to be” as if gender nonconformity is not a concept experienced on a spectrum.

Even if Stede’s clothing can be considered reasonably “masculine” with all the anachronisms, picking flowers, not being able to stomach a “man’s” job, and wearing robes that cause other characters to misgender him are harder sells. The number one thing I see the “Stede is NOT gnc” side say is that these things are only associated with femininity if you’re seeing them from a stereotypical lense. And well… yah. Gender nonconformity is a social construct. That’s what a social construct is. Enjoying bright colors, preferring non-confrontational solutions, wearing a skirt, having long hair, these are all things that are not biologically innate to women. They’re extra characteristics our society uses to construct the idea of a woman. That’s also why gender nonconformity hinges on the cultural context as well. Different societies, different rules.

In order to understand where people are coming from when they say Stede is gnc and use the queerphobia he experiences as evidence, you have to look at the metaphysics. What is homophobia in its original form? What is it made of? I’d argue it’s purest components are the fear that the divides between men and women will break down. It’s considered “an abomination” because sleeping with a man is seen as the natural duty of a woman, and for women, sleeping with a man. Beyond that, all of the baggage that comes with those extra characteristics I mentioned follows suit. Lesbians were by and large excluded from womanhood, in some points of history specifically bottoming was illegal because it was “placing yourself in a woman’s position”, etc.

And that’s not to say masc gay men don’t experience homophobia, they absolutely do. I’m just saying if Stede is experiencing specifically the same bigotry as non-passing queer people do in the form of being excluded from his own gender and even from others in his group, then I don’t think he’s one of those men.

Honestly a thousand kudos to @eluciferate for already bringing Albert from “The Birdcage” to the conversation. Cause he really is the perfect example of not only gender nonconformity beyond the literal surface, but the fact that for many it’s a state of being rather than a conscious choice of queer empowerment. When Albert’s son brings home a girl with very conservative parents, and Albert attempts to “play straight” for his sake… he can’t do it. Even in ultra masculine clothes and trying his best, the nonconformity shines through like toes poking out of old shoes.

Fuck, Stede wasn’t kidding when he said he was “uncomfortable in a married state”. Even the way he carries himself back home looks carefully minded, like his whole life is a play he was horribly miscast for. In other words sometimes you didn’t purposely decide to stick it to the heteronormative man. Sometimes with great gayness comes great responsibility and that’s that.

Jokes aside, we can nickel and dime all his frilly little affects all we want, but at the end of the day Stede is gender nonconforming in a way that goes beyond aesthetic. And I think a lot of people may be hesitant to read him this way because it requires you to acknowledge homophobia in the show, that Stede’s queerness is commented on and something he actively has to mind before even knowing what it is.

[gothprentiss]

another thing. i'm tired ignore me or whatever. it's like-- the post is like "go read the words of women if you want to truly understand the medieval status of women, e.g. christine de pizan" but if you'd actually read the book of the city of ladies then at least some of these whack ass claims would surely have been stopped before they got out to the internet. it does, however, deal at great length with the widespread belief that women ought not be educated, which was already a class-specific argument (education being largely a matter of resources). i am sorry that in the early days of the 11th century cofentre patamere did not write a long hexametrical treatise called de angelo domi to make it easy for you to be reductive. and it is also not like the population in the middle ages seriously contracted due to the totalizing pressure for women to be chaste over all else. this is another notable difference between the two kinds of gender ideals this person is weighing, i.e. material possibility versus figural or archetypal abstraction. at a certain point this is just creating a world from limited evidence, which is exactly the same as everything being critiqued there, and insisting on the primacy of your method. regrettably, because it turns up stuff we like more, as is often the case. like you might make a similar "women of means could not-like-other-girls your way out of gender" about elizabeth blackwell if you had similarly limited access to evidence-- and you would be right, but for a value of right which is just historically quite untenable i think.

there's a post i've seen maybe twice that's got i think at this point 20k notes. it's about how, like, fictional depictions of medieval women Get It All Wrong (true); how our notions of medieval misogyny are relics of the victorian age, not historical reality (eh??); how class is a more realistic way of understanding premodern womanhood than gender (to some extent!); and here are some ways you might consider writing medieval women, e.g. "tip #2: remember that for medieval women, wife and mother wasn’t the ideal, virgin saint was the ideal. By proving yourself “not like other girls” you could gain significant autonomy & freedom".

the idea that victorian people had particular essentialist ideas about the genders (e.g. the angel-in-the-house-style separate spheres philosophy) and either a) medieval people didn't, not to that extent or in that mode OR b) that has overdetermined our notion of what all the past looks like strikes me as more of a starting point than a conclusion.

like, okay, the idea that there was a singular ideal for women (and that it's virgin saint, lol), even just women in a particular period in a particular area of the medieval christian world-- that does run so categorically against the idea that class is more explanatory than gender here. what you might say, though, is that you can extrapolate this as the sole ideal for women from the historical record (i don't think you can, but let's play) as a result of class and social position. christine de pizan was a court scholar for numerous members of the french royal family. most of the writings that survive of medieval christian women are the products of either noblewomen or nuns. but second of all-- you can't say that the virgin saint was the female archetype rather than the mother or the wife. the virgin saint is literally both of those things: she figures the virgin mary, whose virginity is important because of her maternity; she figures the church, which is allegorically the bride of christ. it's also worth noting, of course, that the virgin saint (i.e. the nun, presumably?) is not the same sort of ideal as the wife or the mother in any material way.

all of this is emblematic about how much of the historical record works and is made to work. in terms of real, factual women who were either able to write at great length or written about with any interest, you have the inevitable upper-class bias, as the post tacitly notes: "Often as nuns, saints, mystics; sometimes as warriors, queens, & ladies; always as businesswomen & merchants, women could & did forge their own paths in life" (odd groupings). in drawing in literary sources, as studies of medieval womanhood always do, you have the additional problem of fabulation, which you are trying to read a theory of womanhood or at least an account of gender roles out of. (medievalists, due to the size and conservatism of the field, are also notably not very good readers when it comes to gender.) e.g. the post cites a thesis which is, as i am looking at it now, significantly about the roman de silence (reading it out of the context of hagiography and alongside the roman d'eneas). the desire for fiction to work as historical record is common in medievalism (really in all premodernism), and understandable, and has some foundation. it is rare to see this foundation meaningfully established in this work.

the other problem you have for the concept of medieval women-- whether you just want to, like, depict one, or have some baseline understanding of what their lives were like, or do them justice-- is the privileging of the individual and the outlier. "women could do this in the middle ages" is often a sentence backed up with, like, five truly good examples, one of them legendary. the desire for a history of empowered women gives you a certain kind of returns; the expectation of a history of misogyny gives you a certain kind of returns. this sort of "THIS IS HOW MEDIEVAL* WOMEN REALLY WERE (*LIMITED TO A SPECIFIC SETTING, AREA OF INTEREST, ETC.)" trumpeting is naturally not about all women of that particular context, and to do so-- beyond the really quite blunt-headed approach to the dynamism of both gender and misogyny-- strikes me as a great disservice to this object of study, delimiting womanhood to solely that of the wealthy and, by that same token, empowered. if nothing else it's certainly telling about the state of gender scholarship in pop medieval history (if not also medieval studies) that feminist interventions get you to about the mainstream scholarly feminism of the 80s, where gilbert and gubar write a whole book named for bertha mason that is only really interested in jane eyre.

[calicohyde]

This is a bit of a weird question, but you're the only one I know about who regularly posts about pirates of any kind (admittedly on your other blog) so I figured I'd ask you: what's some stuff you'd want to see more of in pirate fiction? I'm fucking around with a pirate AU for one of my projects and that made me curious - @transman-badass

TL;DR bullet point lists, bolding for emphasis

Necessities:

even if not going for historical accuracy, make sure character designs accurately represent the setting

queer pirates, in particular trans/GNC pirates

POC (Pirates of Color), in particular Black and Indigenous pirates

pirates with body types befitting their lifestyle

religious diversity

Why did you pick pirates if you're not...

commentating on capitalism, colonialism, class, and "crime"

incorporating pirate legends/superstitions in some way

see above points about diversity

Things I personally want to see:

revisit points on diversity again

antivillains

dramatic irony

song and dance

vulgarity

narrative questions built to have no answers

a wider variety of genres; instead of sticking to action/adventure, fantasy, and romance, try a slasher, slice of life, or heist (etc)

More detail on these points + unintentionally effusive praise for Pirates of The Caribbean and Black Sails under the cut.

This is a bit of a (perhaps?) unexpected answer, but my favorite pirate media (that I remember rip) is actually the original PotC trilogy!

While I love the explicit queer representation in Black Sails and OFMD, as well as the political thriller aspect and social realism + commentary of Black Sails, and I'd obviously love to see more of that, they lack some things the first three PotC movies have that I just really fucking love. I don't think any of them are exclusive to pirates necessarily, but I do think a lot of them are particularly well suited to them, and in some ways when they're not incorporated I personally feel like something is missing.

The og PotC trilogy does have its own political aspect and commentary, it's just a bit less confrontational than BS. I wouldn't say it's so subtle as to be a subplot though, it's still a - if not Thee - primary driving factor to the overall narrative and its plot. In my opinion, no pirate media is complete without some aspect of anticapitalist/anticolonialist/antiassimilationist sentiment at its foundation, even if the pirates are not necessarily heroic or righteous - or are downright wicked (derogatory) - in any other way. Pirates make for the perfect antiheroes, antivillains, and villain protagonists, and the latter two are far less explored than the former. And truly what is the point of having a character cast of primarily career thieves if not to say some type of something about the constructs of money and crime?

Another thing is the incorporation of traditional pirate legends/superstitions! I certainly will not be able to find it at will, but there is a post on this site that I wholeheartedly agree with about how cool it is that PotC has a different set of accepted realities depending on who's territory the story is in - i.e. pirate legends are true when the characters are where there be pirates, but aren't on colonial land. There are also pockets of extra depth to the story and characters that only really occur to you if you look at the work through the eyes of someone who exists within the pirates' world, such as Elizabeth's Kiss of Death At Sea.

It also of course ties in perfectly with the allegory; the further colonialism/capitalism spreads -> the smaller pirate habitat shrinks -> the less magic there is/the more reality is confined to only what Is and can no longer extend to what Could Be, shown most directly by the beached Kraken and Jack's response of "The world's still the same [size], there's just less in it." Which in that particular context also reinforces the above highlighted built-in moral ambiguity/acknowledgement of the beauty and necessity of things that may harm you (or pose a challenge to your conquering power), in that only the movie before the Kraken was a direct threat to Jack, and in fact literally killed him, but he still recognizes its extermination as both an indication of worse to come and as a tragedy in its own right. Also shown really well in how an "incorrect" pirate-drawn map can get you places that, when using an "accurate" colonial-standard map, don't exist. And how Beckett can't get Jack's magic compass to work for him even though he knows what it's supposed to do, only a pirate (or pirate-to-be like Norrington) can use it. The Power of Belief in this way is and always will be my number one homie. I got slightly off topic and just started talking about PotC. Anyway.

The dual accepted realities allow for really great dramatic irony as well. Gods and monsters and cursed treasure and impossibly fast and unsinkable ships and the undead are all real, and the audience knows all that based merely on the setup, but to the characters it's a shocking twist. Black Sails has some dramatic irony that I really love as well. The audience knows that Black Sails is a Treasure Island prequel, and they know the culmination of the featured historical events, but the characters don't. I eat that shit up and it's fucking delicious every time. And I also love that good good opposite of dramatic irony in these too, where the audience will never know something the characters do. BS does it through a well crafted metafiction narrative and unreliable narrators. "A story is true, a story is untrue," and this story acknowledges itself as a story - one told by conquerers, liars, visionaries, and warrior poets. We will never know what "really" happened, and we're not meant to.

Anyway even if pirate legends aren't real or *shrug emoji* in-universe, I again think pirate media is incomplete if a few aren't textually present in some other way.

Back to representation stuff. As I said, while Black Sails and OFMD have it pretty good, there should be way more queer pirates, and in particular trans/gender-nonconforming pirates. I'd specifically like to see a portrayal of Mary/Mark Read as being trans/fluid/whatever, rather than "disguised" or "mistaken" as a man (if the piece features historical figures). Equally so, there needs to be way more racial diversity in pirate media, in particular Black and Indigenous pirates. Probably most of the famous Captains you could name off the top of your head were white Englishmen, but there's a lot of evidence that a high percentage of pirates were not. So tbh I think this is less of a "feels" incomplete thing and more of an IS incomplete thing.

Likewise, there should be more body diversity and religious diversity. These things are obviously inaccurate and a Choice to exclude anywhere, but again imo an extra level of dumbassery to exclude from a pirate thing. Model/movie star body types should be rare; we need to be looking at athletes and laborers when designing Golden Age sailors. We need to be taking into account the available medicine of the time period and the lasting consequences thereof, as well as more of the (known) cultural ideas about body differences, neurological differences, sickness, and death. And as for religion, there seems to be vast swathes of people who think once upon a time everyone was either a Christian (be that Good or Bad) or a Savage (whether Noble/Mystic or not). And that is SO deeply fucking annoying - to say it in the blandest, most diplomatic way possible lol.

Even if you're not going to go in for much historical accuracy, you're doing a fantastical/romanticized/comedic/etc version, or you're making a whole secondary world from scratch, you really should be figuring out what would be accurate to the conditions you create. If your piece takes place on a frigate sailing the open ocean in the tropics for long periods of time while the nearest land is being colonized by monarchic northerners in an approximation of the 17th century, the characters should reflect that just as much as the setting and plot.

Now for some things I wouldn't necessarily be disappointed about being absent, but that I would just be kinda jazzed to see. First: song, dance, storytelling, riddles, foul language, and bawdy jokes. This kind of goes hand in hand with the legends and all, but is an extra layer that isn't put on enough! PotC and OFMD have some song, and BS as already mentioned is pretty heavy on storytelling both diegetically and as a main theme. I just want more.

Second, I'd love to see a wider variety of genres. We're spoiled for pirate action/adventure, fantasy, romance/erotica, and coming of age. I want to see some scifi that isn't just pirates In Space (not that I have anything against pirates In Space or think it's not scifi Enough, but we're not starving for it). Pirate slasher. Pirate slice of life. Pirate whodunit. Pirate time travel. Pirate psychological thriller. Pirate disaster/post-apocalypse. Pirate slipstream/surrealism. Pirate heist!! Pirate procedural? somehow?? You get it.

I think I've talked enough now wkgoiuwksk.

[starswallowingsea]

Suguru Geto is a fucking eugenicist and I'm tired of people just brushing that aside to make silly gay fanart of him: an essay.

Hi hello JJK tag I have come to drop one singular essay to you and I do hope you'll at least listen, since it is a serious issue that needs to be addressed.

Before we get into the meat and potatoes of this essay, lets first define eugenics and why it's bad. Strictly speaking, eugenics is the movement for "racial purity" that requires the planned reproduction of people only within narrowly defined racial categories, as well as the elimination of undesirables within a population (oftentimes people of color, disabled people, and queer people) via sterilization or death. The movement began in the late 19th century and continues to some extent to this day. You can read more about it here if you're interested.

Eugenics goes hand in hand with other forms of bigotry and manifests in how people refer to each other, including some of the ways that Geto refers to non sorcerers within the manga, even before his death and subsequent possession of his body by a spirit. Geto refers to regular humans as "monkeys" and cleans himself in response to coming into contact with him. This sounds familiar, doesn't it?

This wording is very intentional on the part of Akutami and the translator. Geto is a villain and meant to be someone we see in disgust and while there are sympathetic villains in other series and I'm not going to say that you can never like villain characters (some of my own favorite characters are villains who have done fucked up things before), there is a difference between the two. Geto is specifically a representation of eugenicist, racist, xenophobic beliefs that exist in the real world. He is not someone who is fed up with the system, he is not someone who just wants to fuck around and find out.

This comment here further emphasizes my point. One of the core ideas behind scientific racism and eugenics is the idea of biological races or that people with different skin tones have different, distinct biological functions in their body. An example of this in our world involves GFR production and "race corrections" in kidney tests (source) that are only just starting to be phased out in the medical field. The idea of needing a race correction for something like kidney function is a product of scientific racism and indirectly plays into eugenics. Denying that people are the same race or even species as you because of uncontrollable factors (sorcerer abilities, skin color, country of origin, sexuality, gender, etc) is uh. Not a good thing!

"Monkeys" is a word that comes up frequently with Geto's talks on non sorcerers as well. It's a loaded term and again a deliberate choice on behalf of both Akutami and the translator to use it. Historically, due to scientific racism in the field of evolutionary science specifically, black people and people of color were assumed to be more closely related to monkeys and therefore "less evolved" than white people. It's a loaded word used with intention by Geto and by Akutami in the writing of Geto's character.

IN CONCLUSION can we please stop woobifying Geto as a character. His ideals and goals are an important part of him and watering him down to do gay shit with Gojo is really not what we should be doing with him in fan works. Yes Gojo's reaction to losing his friend to essentially the far right pipeline of eugenics and fascism is realistic and it's okay for Gojo to feel hurt and betrayed by this, but the reality is that Geto broke away because he believed so strongly that the world needed to be cleansed of non sorcerers and Gojo eventually accepted that he lost his friend, no matter how much it hurt to let go. This is an important part of Gojo's character arc and development but to ignore the everything about Geto's beliefs and never acknowledge them, or god forbid make JOKES about this stuff is a surefire way to make sure disabled people and people of color don't feel safe talking with you.

Notes:

I cannot stop you from shipping Satosugu or any other Geto ship. This essay was meant to inform people of the deeper meaning behind Geto's beliefs and maybe help some people see that real life issues are reflected in the media they consume. JJK is not a work that shies away from handling harder topics and this is no exception.

I will not be responding to any bad faith arguments on this post or in my inbox. If you have a genuine question feel free to come talk to me and I am willing to have a civil discussion with you about it, but calling me names or insulting me will be met with a block button so just save yourself the trouble and block me first.

[alpaca-clouds]

Why do "conservatives" love the middle ages so much?

Let me talk about this one topic regarding the middle ages and how they are portrayed in pop culture, but especially how a certain subset of people are very, very loud about it. And I with that I mean conservatives, or - let's be honest - right wingers.

We all know "sword guys", right? As someone, who was for a time part of the LARP scene, I knew actually several "sword guys". Like, nerds that collect sword replicas, at times even armor replica and then spend their weekends running around and playing "medieval knight".

In of itself this is not a problem. Everyone needs a hobby, right? But... I think that sword guys are actually a good window into what is happening the entire thing with the conservatives/right-wingers and the middle ages.

See, whenever anything medieval related is released anywhere - no matter whether it is pseudo-historic or outright fantasy - there is gonna be a wholeass army of nerds who will then come along and decry all sorts of stuff that they do not like as "ahistorical".

You know. Stuff like women getting shit done, or being in a position of power. Queer people existing. Or people of color doing the same: existing.

And yes, in fact there is a whole subset of "nerds", who are very vocal about what can only be described a "mythic past". As in, a past that has never existed. This is not really a new phenomena. This is something that mostly has its origin in 19th century Europe and it is called Medievalism.

I am not really interested in going into the origins of medievalism and how it is connected partly to the romantic movement. All you need to know is, that the Nazis were really, really into it - as were other fascist movements in medieval Europe.

There is a reason for this, of course. And this is linked to one of the cores of rightwing mythologies: A very toxic nostalgia and the idealization of that mythic past. Which is, ironically, also closely linked to capitalism.

Let me explain: A core part of both conservatism and ideas that are even further right are based on the idea that they want to either conserve a status quo - or more likely return to a past status-quo. And this is something that became more attractive specifically to a certain subsect of men under capitalism.

Under capitalism most people kinda feel alienated from their work and even society. Because most people feel like there is not much use in what they do and their work is not valued in all the important ways. And let me be clear: This is true. And this was true from the very beginning of capitalism. The working class is exploited, was exploited and always will be exploited.

This is also one of the core reasons for why right wing ideologies are so attractive to certain people is, that they give them an easy scapegoat in all the minorities they are blaming for... everything. "No, the problem that you are exploited is not capitalism, it is a Jewish conspiracy!" - "No, the reason you feel so alienated is not capitalism, it is 'the woke mob'." And so on.

And here is where medievalism comes in. Because it provides these people with a fantasy for them. A time where all was right (from their point of view) and where they would have been honored and could have been heroes. A time when they would have been knights and would have saved their distressed damsel. A time at which the gays were hung or burned, in which there was no feminism and of course Black people did not yet exist.

Of course, the reality is that in the medieval times they would not have been a heroic knight, but a peasant working on the field or - if lucky - maybe a tradesman. They might have been called in to fight, but it would have been a rather miserable and not at all heroic affair.

But they want that fantasy of that past in which all of the problems, they perceive in the present, have not existed. A past, in which they would have been seen as more valuable than capitalism sees them. In which they would have been honored just for being white guys.

This is a past, that never existed. But they want to believe in it - because right wing ideologies of course do not offer them any actual solutions for their problem. Because again: Their actual problem is capitalism, and right wing propaganda exists precisely to distract from this fact.

[mactiir]

So you want to learn to swordfight.

The most common question I see in historical fencing forums and on social media is "how do you get into HEMA?"

If you're like "what's HEMA?" -- that's Historical European Martial Arts -- it's the study and recreation of historical martial arts through weapons manuals written at the time! Many people take a scholarly approach to it -- focused on reading and recreating martial systems -- but many take a sport approach, because martial techniques are designed to be used martially! This means we're fencing -- swordfighting! Think Olympic fencing with bigger swords and slightly different rules, and more colorful gear. In this post, I will be more focused on how to get into the sporty, competition-focused side of the hobby.

Historical Fencing is a martial art! This is a really common confusion from folks who are more familiar with more well-known sword-loving communities. It's not LARPING (though I love a good LARP) -- we aren't playing characters or scenarios, and we don't dress up (usually-- rapier fencers love poofy pants, lol). It's not stage combat or SCA (although there's some community overlap)-- most of us are less interested in recreating periods or aesthetics from history than we are in learning to fence, and compete, with our weapons of choice. Although LARPing, SCA, and stage combat are all cousin hobbies to WMA, the closest analogue to Historical Fencing as a hobby is... Modern Fencing! Kendo and blade-focused Eastern Martial arts, like Kenjutsu, are also much more like historical fencing than SCA is.

Whether you're considering starting longsword fencing because your favorite author uses it as a reference, rapier fencing because it's the coolest weapon in your favorite video game, or just because you think it'd be sick as hell (it is), here's a (noncomprehensive) FAQ for becoming your very own sword lesbian/broadsword bisexual/greatsword gay/spear queer.

I don't know if there are any classes near me, where do I look?

The best place to start is the Hema Alliance Club Finder. You can use it to look up classes and sparring groups in your immediate geographic area.

2. The Club closest to me doesn't offer the weapon I'm interested in. Should I still go?

Yes. Most clubs are "longsword" clubs, but it’s really rare to find a historical fencer that exclusively fences a single system or weapon. Even if nobody at the club fences the system you're interested in, you can 1) probably talk them into it and 2)fencing not-your-weapon will still make you better at your-weapon. My club is a "longsword" club, but we have fencers who regularly do saber, rapier, rapier and dagger, messer, messer and buckler, side sword and buckler, katana, broadsword, spear, and even montante (greatsword). Just ask!

3) The nearest club is too far away. Can I learn just by studying manuals online?

Yes and no. I don’t recommend doing lots of solo practice without having attended a class. It's a good way to engrain bad habits, as well as avoid fencing altogether ("i cant spar yet, my form isn't perfect/ive learned bad habits" or worse, "i don’t need to spar, i know all the manuals inside and out"). This is a really important point: LEARNING TO MOVE A SPECIFIC WEAPON IS LESS THAN 30% OF FENCING, and you will be moving through guards and forms like a pro with only a few months of intentional practice. Your cut form can be picture-perfect and you will still get wrecked in a bout if you don't have experience. Most of fencing is understanding timing, distance, your psychology and your opponent's, and knowing from experience which positions you can get to from what other positions. You can only learn to fence by... fencing. Now, if your thing is studying arms manuals and replicating them picture-perfect, which some people are into, more power to you! But it won't be winning you any tournaments, and I am writing this assuming you want to do the sporty/swordfighty side of things.

4) wait, there are books on swordfighting?

Yes. Check Wiktenauer. Most of them are free. My club does Joachim Meyer; Fiore and Lichtenauer are also fairly common for longsword.

5) I really can't get to classes, though. Am I just out of luck?

Is there an Olympic fencing group nearby? How about lightsaber fencing? No, seriously. Kendo? Boxing? All of these things train the exact skills that are difficult to learn in HEMA fencing -- distance, timing, reaction speed, fight psychology. Some of the best beginners I've ever sparred came from lightsaber, or kendo. If there is no group nearby at all, pick up a copy of Meyer's art of combat and a 12-inch length of steel pipe (it's the same weight as a longsword) to learn how to move the sword (do NOT hit people with this, oh my god), go to kendo for a few months, and you'll be in decent shape for WMA sparring when you can get to a group.

The reason HEMA is fun is because of the community! Even if it's a really intense commute, try to make it to class at least once or twice. You will enjoy it more, you will learn more, and you will fence better. Don't just do it all on your own! Most of the people in these groups have fallen into the common mistakes so YOU don't have to. Utilize them!

6) What do I do if there are no people to spar with nearby?

Why don't you start a group? Purpleheart armory sells foam swords for like $50 each. Get some friends, get everybody a mask and a boffer and get to it! This is how HEMA as a hobby started -- people messing around with foam trainers and a copy of a 16th century arms manual.

6.5) I'm sparring outside of a club -- should we use synthetics, wood, or steel?

Dude, just use foam until you can get a complete steel kit. Keep in mind: synthetics can be as dangerous as steel, wood is MORE dangerous than steel, and steel requires full safety kit for full speed sparring. Don't break your fingers because you wanted to look cool. These things HURT, and can cause serious injury unless used with intention.

7) should I buy a sword?

If you're with a HEMA school, they will have their own cadence for buying gear, and the sword is usually the last thing you get. You should only buy a federschwert (training sword) once you know your style and sword preference. If you're not following a club cadence or planning to attend a tournament, Do Not buy a steel weapon. A full steel spar kit costs like $800 dollars, and without a full safety kit all you have is a $300 wall ornament nobody can use.

And don't buy a blunt, please. Beginners love blunts because they look like "real swords". They also break bones. Federschwerts are standard in the community and nobody is going to think you’re cool for showing up with a weapon designed to snap someone's humerus in half. If you're that twisted about it, Sigi forge sells schiltless feders that look like "real" swords (a feder is a real sword, but I digress).

8) what safety gear should I buy?

Every club and tournament has its own recommendations. Look at the Mid-Continental HEMA Open rules for a very standard list of gear reqs for a reputable tournament. Generally, in this order, it's:

-mask (don't point a sword at anyone without one of these on)

-chest plastron (for preventing unfortunate accidents that might send shards through the lungs)

-gorget (rigid or semi-rigid)

-hardshell gloves (don't do lacrosse gloves or other soft gloves for longsword, you'll break your fingers)

-puncture-resistant jacket

-forearms/elbows

-shins/knees

-back of head protector (concussions bad)

-pants/skirt

-sword

I probably missed something but these are the most common questions-- fellow HEMAists or interested parties, lmk if I missed anything! Happy fencing!

[kimyoonmiauthor]

Short Note on Diversity in novels...

During a certain writing event that starts with N, I often tried to research and find ways to write more diversity.

So there were ten rounds of people on both sides saying, "Don't include it for clout" and "don't do it to be token."

For me, these days, I add diversity because it's my lived experience and often it solves plot issues. No, really. Sometimes the character just shows up and I'm thinking, you're not acting how I thought, you're not acting NT. Could you be ND? If so, what type are you?

And then doing to research to lean into it rather than spending time taking it out is a lot more helpful to the story because how they act is rooted into the basis of the story.

People tend to think that adding diversity "adds more problems". But I kinda think adding historical accuracy or race diversity to NYC or off-hand mentioning that Rromani exist in a Europe setting solves issues like "Hey, here is an entire group that is dedicated to trading! You no longer have to question how Silk got to Europe." might give a richness and feel more accurate?

The fact that people couldn't figure out during that event that PoCs have relatives was wild to me. lol "I couldn't possibly write more than one Black person." Wha—where do you think Black people come from? Also Queer people would attract Queer people too? NDs attract NDs? So the idea of the lone gay (usually Black if they are going Intersectional) dude being the ONLY one in the entire world, is wild to me. You don't think the Black dude has a Black friends and maybe other PoC friends, because ya know, Black people have to hang around only white people and never know other Black people? You don't think the lone gay dude might want to do more than "fashion", "hair", "crafts" and actually date another gay guy? Just asking.

So usually, for me, it helps solve dilemmas. Like hey, if this group of people have known what it is like to handle horses for thousands of years, maybe they can help solve this plot dilemma with a horse. Let's research their group and how they handle horses because my characters don't come from a nomadic horse tribe.

This character doesn't seem to want to date anyone. Why? Could they be... ace aro? If so, what kind? If they aren't, why haven't they? or are they really aro/ace but haven't faced it yet and thus are being unintentionally destructive (BTW, this was me at one point when I didn't understand I was aro/ace and yeah, not my finest hour...)

It doesn't have to be a big deal, the big deal is to make sure to back it up with research even if you belong to that label.

For me, being NB, I had to research trans (binary) people better. Also wrap my head around the European version of trans rep, which I still don't always understand fully. The whole, you must when transitioning a character, make it painful? Why??? Like isn't there Queer and trans joy in transitioning and not all of it is surgery? Yeah. But understanding other perspectives than your own can help shake loose your story to give different flavor to your characters so they aren't "Token" and you can rep various PoVs, even if they aren't center stage. (Some of the you musts also didn't make sense to me... but I've posted those.)

But yeah, sometimes adding diversity helps save you having to rewrite the whole thing. And it solves plot issues—like having the Harfoots kinda like Rromani/traveling Jews solves how to get Gandalf safely from Point A to Point B. Having the elves being various skin colors solves why the spawning place for elves is roughly 30 degrees north which, BTW, lines up with the races on Earth at that latitude. Sometimes making the person Jewish explains why they are so good at inane arguments. lol (Saying this as a Jew... I can list the inane arguments my family has had). So yes, sometimes adding diversity helps rather than hinders and gives you more events you can add.

Your characters are meeting their grandmother coming from India while in Regency England! Well, you've just opened discussions on imperialism, food, language issues, generational wealth, clothing and questions about immigration and heritage. Plot bunnies galore. Are you stuck still? (BTW, this is accurate too).

[absolutebl]

best bls with external conflict (conflict outside the relationship)?

Hum, this one kind of answers this but it's not been updated in a while:

BLs With The Best External Conflict  

Until We Meet Again (Thailand) - will probably always top this list. It’s a perfectly executed story, fantastic well seeded plot twists, and the only BL I would love to see adapted by other countries or read professionally translated. There is a lot of internal strife but the conflict is the result of the sins of the past, so I think it counts.

Color Rush (Korea) - I lost my mind over the allegory and the perfection of the story to the point of forgiving it certain other sins in stiffness and low heat. The world-building is too simple for it to play well to a SF/F genre only audience but it’s absolutely groundbreaking for BL. (Color Rush 2 continues the story and while I don’t like it as a BL, and the plot is somewhat typical, it’s still better than most.) 

He’s Coming to Me (Thailand) - such a clever take on both paranormal romance and the cohabitation trope, what I love about this is how closely the story and the supernatural conceits are married to each other. Basically boy and ghost move in together, fall in love while they investigate murder. 

HIStory 3: Trapped (Taiwan) - Taiwan often struggles with story structure but Trapped is different. It has a baby murder investigation that promotes conflict between the leads, so the romantic tension is between plot and character, it’s so clever.

Long Time No See (Korea) - Catfishing assassins on either side of a turf war who fall in love not knowing they are on opposite sides. Or do they? Good fight sequences, mature characters, high heat, very suspenseful, AND an HEA. If you like KinnPorsche you will LOVE this one.

Bad Buddy (Thailand) - This was GMMTV’s flagship BL and it started 2022 on a BANG (okay no actual banging but you know what I mean), starring heavy hitters Ohm & Nanon in a pitch perfect university Romeo & Romeo masterpiece that will give you domesticity meets pain whiplash throughout and jet lag at the end. The conflict is all family and friend pressure, some of which is overworked, but it has great production values, killer acting, and some conscious effort to correct for half a decade of Thai BL’s anti-queer mistakes. Full review.

Nobleman Ryu’s Wedding (Korea) - this has a 12th Night meets Cinderfella feel to it, plus some great story tricks like a plot that requires a historical setting (I love it when narrative elements are codependent).

Triage (Thailand) - a “correct the past” Groundhog Day story, that has narrative baggage I normally do not like but is so clever about time loops, I have to forgive it my own hang-ups. About a doctor who must save a boy to fix reality, but not in the usual way. 

Not Me (Thailand) - GMMTV gave us a dark disestablishment narrative (in a time of civil unrest) with established queer award-winning director Anucha and starring the biggest guns of BL, OffGun and IT WAS AN AMAZING THING to get to experience at the time - nerve racking but remarkable. But was it ACTUALLY BL? It certainly has a lot of BL elements, but in the end romance was not what this show was about, or even what it was genuinely trying to be as a performance piece. Still a special moment in Thai cinema, certainly worth your time. Don’t worry, it all ends happily. Full review.

The Eclipse (Thailand) - GMMTV does gay Blacklist with a good boy/bad boy pairing. Starred First & Khaotung plus the side dish pair from FUTS NeoLouis. This is a good show but the cast was excellent and the leads were absolutely flawless elivating it beyond good. They gave us a nuanced and multifaceted burgeoning relationship: philosophical (and socio-political) conflict contrasted to moments of empathy; flirtation contrasted to moments of genuine affection. This narrative is less about love than it is about courage and tenderness. However, near the end the pacing was off and the plot frustrating. Still, this is an enjoyable watch, with an finale that features verbal consent and a funny blooper reel.

Others to try

You Make Me Dance

Manner of Death

Tinted With You

3 Will Be Free

Great Men Academy

[nyracel]

“laena/rhaenyra wasn’t even a paragraph why are you so mad that they were scrapped for the show?”

oh i don’t know janice maybe because it being in a historical text written 200 years after the fact by ultra religious MEN who despise women and queerness all together IS noteworthy? ‘more than fond of’ is an allegory used multiple times in the asoiaf main timeline to describe romantic feelings and you’re mad that people read that phrase the way it was intended? not to mention it’s used in conjunction with ‘while the princess misliked her stepmother’ like COME ON at this point you’re being deliberately stupid. i’m sorry they weren’t scissoring each other for 200 pages but in actuality what did you expect? acting like rhaenyra and alicent were so so in love when we were only shown a couple scenes of them getting along max during a six month period. the only way that ship will ever be canon is through the actors. the show leaves crumbs for asshats like you because they know you’ll bend over backwards to defend them. apparently it’s still okay to queerbait in the year of our lord 2k24; along with sidelining a woman of color because diversity was important until it came to fleshing out a black woman and her canon sapphicness.

laena, for the limited time we had her character, was fiery, bold, and adventurous. she claimed the largest and oldest dragon alive at 12! the show choosing to racebend her only to mitigate her affect on the plot is gross! they did it to keep the ‘what if they were in love’ guessing game and gift it to a white woman. a white woman who vehemently HATED rhaenyra. we just wanted the story to have complex and multilayered characters rhaenyra has NO FRIENDS besides the first *two* episodes that is the definition of shitty storytelling. a targaryen princess at the height of her families power the literal protagonist of the dance and you all want her to be a lonely spinster boy mom who’s not like the other girls so bad when she was literally surrounded by women all of whom she cared about dearly. multiple relationships with others helps bring a story to life and would’ve helped tremendously with making the dumb as rocks audience understand rhaenyra’s character and how she was a girls girl in a time where you really couldn’t afford to be one which is why it’s so tragic when she starts turning on them during the dance but nooo the ONLY relationship that matters is a busted up friendship that the writers have in a chokehold for no good reason and fuck everyone else that these women might care about right? fuck rhaenyra fuck laena fuck alicent fuck their kids fuck their GRANDKIDS they’re all just mostly blank slates anyway what impact is their death going to have on the narrative? next to nothing because of these fuckass decisions. let’s just all agree to throw stones at glass houses THAT would be more fulfilling for the show than half of the shit they gave us.

[triviareads]

i love your bridgerton takes and i’m curious - if you had a chance to rewrite s2 of bridgerton, what changes would you make?

ah thanks! you know, it's been two years and at this point I've kinda resigned myself to Shondaland's priorities (unnecessary drama, lady whistledown) and what they're disregarding (people of color, queer rep, the actual historical romance-ness of it all), but here's how I would rewrite Bridgerton season two:

Without explaining exactly what India's role in this post-but-not-really-post-racial world is, I'm uncomfortable with the colonial implications there as well as the fact that that they made the Sharmas from India, as opposed to the casting the exact same actors— Simone Ashley, Charithra Chandran, Shelley Conn— and having them be from Somerset. Hell, they could have kept some of the same customs like the Haldi and oiling hair, but made the Sharmas like allllll the other POCs in the ton; no one knows how they got there, but they're equal now so.... yay.

I also dislike how culturally confused the Sharmas were; they were using words from multiple Indian languages because the writers thought they'd do this weird pan-Indian culture for them. Pick a language, pick a region for them to be from, and stick to it

"Kathani" as a name should never have existed: here's all my research on why it's a name that means nothing, which is the antithesis of Indian culture, where name meanings matter. it's also insulting that her "actual" name was only used once; clearly the writers thought it was too ethnic to be used when she was introduced to us and other characters, but they wanted to pander to desi people so they included ONE Kathani in the end.

I want the Sharmas as a group to have WAY more screen time. I also think the family dynamic was royally mischaracterized. The writers were lazy and decided to make Kate's role in the family echo Anthony's which resulted in her basically.... taking over? And the results were disastrous even though she obviously meant well. A more feminist take, to me, would be this idea of all 3 Sharma ladies doing their part and pulling through together (well Mary and Kate a little more than Edwina) because there is no patriarch to provide for them, and that's something they could really have honed in on. So Kate and Mary would be making a lot of tough choices together, while Edwina is painfully cognizant that she's gonna be the one to marry up and provide for her family.

Because the Sharmas would be from Somerset, I think their backstory would be very similar to the book; dad is dead, they've scraped and saved up for one season, Kate is going to make a *sensible* match in the country (as opposed to having no marriage aspirations at all, which I found so weird considering she was 18ish when her dad died and COULD have married to save her family, regardless of her dowry or lackthereof she's a beautiful woman whose father clearly had some status as a royal secretary so that entire line of reasoning that she HELD OFF on marriage and decided to train Edwina to be the Ideal Debutante is bullshit on the writer's part to me) but Edwina is gonna be the shining star diamond who marries a rich enough dude to save all of them from destitution

Newton makes Anthony fall into the lake while he's still courting Edwina (similar to the scene's placement in the book)

And similar to the book I'd much rather Anthony take his courtship of Edwina only so far, like, honestly I'd be chill if he compromised Kate while still courting Edwina. I think it's unrealistic for Edwina to be entirely fine with this turn of events like she was in the books but the blowout would never have been necessary, and quite frankly, I think Edwina shrieked at Kate about the wrong things in the show. I'd personally be horrified my sister is conducting an affair with my suitor/fiancé and more importantly for Edwina, I think I'd want to know why, if my sister liked this guy, does she not think she's good enough for him and why does she keep throwing Edwina at him?

I'd do an extended study scene where not only do they talk about Edmund, but they also talk about Kate's dad who, when he died, left an even bigger gap in their family because like I said earlier, he was the male figure and it was SO Hard without a male in the family back then; The Bridgertons were actually lucky because Anthony was of age and was able to take over where it mattered most, with Violet's guidance. So that's what I'd want them to talk about and bond over.

I'd LOVE the book compromise moment; I think it's the most hysterical part of TVWLM and I'd want Portia Featherington to utter the immortal lines "Lud, girl, he had his mouth on your bubbies, and we all saw it." But then I think Kate should have refused to marry him because she she can't reconcile her dislike of him with her attraction buuuuuuuut then they have a blowout argument in the gazebo and then he eats her out and dickmatizes her into agreeing to marry him. They should have fucked a lot sooner than episode 7 because the chemistry was THERE and a compromise-turn-marriage plot like the book would allow for it. So less face-breathing, more fucking.

And that would lead to the wedding we all wanted to see except it's fraught with drama because a) the scandal and b) Kate still thinks she's Anthony's second choice

I'd loooooove a wedding night seduction scene

And then the issue becomes similar to the book's conflict at this point— Anthony still fears for his mortality, while Kate is falling for him but feels trapped in this marriage because she can't.... express those feelings because Anthony doesn't want love in their marriage

And then, fine, Kate has that riding accident except this time after she confesses her love and he freaks out and the accident is the nudge they need to make up and finally confess their love for each other

No Cousin Jack— that was such a bullshit plot because a) if he wasn't dicking down Portia while being engaged to her daughter what even was the point and b) he left in such a definitive way at the end of S2 so again, what was the point

We didn't need an episode devoted to the inner machinations of how Lady Whistledown works, nor did we need Marina implicitly endorsing polin which is so fucking disgusting considering Penelope literally shamed her into a botched abortion. I'd also like for Penelope to not microaggress Kate (calling a brown woman a "beast")

I think the Sheffield plot could have been reworked in some way; sure maybe Mary ran from her aristocratic family to marry a poor gentleman and they disowned her and now they're dangling an inheritance over their heads. I think it could have been more neatly done.

Colin's ponzi scheme crusher arc was unnecessary and dull

I liked where they took Benedict's arc actually; you really got the sense he wanted love but doesn't quite know what it is yet (his poem he gives to Anthony feels like he's worshipping a muse, not loving them for who they are), and he's in a shitty place by the end and doubting his abilities as an artist...... which would be a GREAT time for a love interest for him to come in

Eloise slumming it for a hot minute could have been done wayyyyy better starting with a hotter man, more chemistry, and more exploration