Swearing, horrible puns, snopes-sniping, and science. Semifrequent rants on art history and fiction in context. Often sighted on the premises: Indiana Jones. With your host, sentient cube

Posts Tagged: history

sourcedumal:

girljanitor:

innocent-bystanders-inc:

nudiemuse:

princelesscomic:

girljanitor:

Self Evident Truths

S. Ross Browne

Ummm…I am so VERY into this right now!

But Black people in period or fantasy settings totally makes the stories unreal.

Also holy shit I love these.

How come I don’t run across this stuff regularly?

Because of racism and the retroactive erasure of POC in Medieval Europe. Pretty much the same reason you almost never see these works of art either unless you’re already looking for them:

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

But it’s SOOOOOOOOOOO UNREALISTIC TO SEE BLACK PEOPLE IN MEDIEVAL EUROPE!!!!

/sarcasm

(via brashblacknonbeliever)

Source: girljanitor

visitheworld:

El Castillo mayan pyramid at Xunantunich in western Belize (by Tall KiD).

visitheworld:

El Castillo mayan pyramid at Xunantunich in western Belize (by Tall KiD).

(via architectureofdoom)

Source: visitheworld

doll-freaking-house:

schazam:


Elizabeth Báthory is one of the most prolific serial killers in all of history.
She was born into nobility and was highly educated but also very vain.
One day, infuriated, Elizabeth struck one of her servant girls so hard that some blood dripped from her face onto Elizabeth’s hand and she immediately thought that her skin took on a glowing freshness of her young maid.
Elizabeth believed she had found the secret of eternal youth. After this, women were abducted and hung upside down, while they were still alive and their throats were slit to prepare Elizabeth’s bath.
The Countess of Transylvania and four collaborators were accused of torturing and killing hundreds of girls, with one witness attributing to them over 650 victims, though the number for which they were convicted was 80. Elizabeth herself was neither tried nor convicted.

Can I just time in here and say a few things, since half of what is written here is straight from the wikipedia page, which don’t get me wrong —it’s accurate— but extremely underwhelming.
“Elizabeth” Erzebet Bathory was so much more than some vain bitch who killed over 650 women, she was a vain bitch who could speak and write more than two languages, in a time where a woman writing one was unheard of. She was raised mostly by her very infamous openly bisexual aunt, and was a torturer and a murderer before she was 14 (rumored).
This woman was the person who made the villagers quake in both fear and revelation, that the courts refused to take action against when young girls started dissapearing, when bodies started being found. She OWNED the country, her family was richer then even the Lords presiding over it, she had all the say.
Her and her ‘accomplices” (which by the way, they were extremely trusted, and unlike her, they were executed without mercy when the truth came out), would gather village children who their parents practically threw their way in hopes of a better future, although the children would never live again. She didn’t only hang them, she caged them, used iron maidens, spears, so many different objects. And the whole ‘bathing in blood’ thing, although is technically can be true, that and the whole striking her maid is all exagerrated to add to the story. Her and her husband got off to killing, literally, they liked the screams. If she bathed in blood, it wasn’t to be younger, it was to enjoy their life ending. Not to say she wasn’t vain, but for good reason. She was considered the most beautiful woman in Hungary for all of her days.
And she technically was tried, although as I said before she practically owned the country, they couldn’t actually kill her. But she had killed another young girl of noble blood, and that couldn’t just be set aside. So instead of execution, they sentenced her to house arrest for the rest of her days, unable to punish her for all the women she had killed.
Also, she had three children, and regardless of her murderous ways it was said that she had been a wonderful, loving mother. Strange how the ‘vain blood mistress’ can be more than just, isn’t it?
I could go on and on about this woman, I’ve read and watched basically everything pertaining to her due to reports and essays that I wrote when I was younger, and even though she was a horrifying murderer, she deserves a bit more than ‘blood bitch’.

YES for the accurate commentary!
I researched the hell out of this woman back in the day just for fun because she was just so fascinatingly grotesque to me.  A lot of her methods of torture were things I integrated into my own stories.  Particularly the iron maidens, and pouring freezing water onto the naked bodies of her victims while they were dragged out into the snow.  This woman was scarier than Vlad the Impaler because the things he did were done mostly in order to gain political notoriety  which was a huge asset back in hisday.  Erzebet, however, tortured women for her own sadistic means of entertainment.  She implemented an unsettling brand of eroticism into her methods of torture. She may as well have invented the connotations of the word sanguine. Very few historical figures can give me nightmares quite like she can. 

doll-freaking-house:

schazam:

Elizabeth Báthory is one of the most prolific serial killers in all of history.

She was born into nobility and was highly educated but also very vain.

One day, infuriated, Elizabeth struck one of her servant girls so hard that some blood dripped from her face onto Elizabeth’s hand and she immediately thought that her skin took on a glowing freshness of her young maid.

Elizabeth believed she had found the secret of eternal youth. After this, women were abducted and hung upside down, while they were still alive and their throats were slit to prepare Elizabeth’s bath.

The Countess of Transylvania and four collaborators were accused of torturing and killing hundreds of girls, with one witness attributing to them over 650 victims, though the number for which they were convicted was 80. Elizabeth herself was neither tried nor convicted.

Can I just time in here and say a few things, since half of what is written here is straight from the wikipedia page, which don’t get me wrong —it’s accurate— but extremely underwhelming.

“Elizabeth” Erzebet Bathory was so much more than some vain bitch who killed over 650 women, she was a vain bitch who could speak and write more than two languages, in a time where a woman writing one was unheard of. She was raised mostly by her very infamous openly bisexual aunt, and was a torturer and a murderer before she was 14 (rumored).

This woman was the person who made the villagers quake in both fear and revelation, that the courts refused to take action against when young girls started dissapearing, when bodies started being found. She OWNED the country, her family was richer then even the Lords presiding over it, she had all the say.

Her and her ‘accomplices” (which by the way, they were extremely trusted, and unlike her, they were executed without mercy when the truth came out), would gather village children who their parents practically threw their way in hopes of a better future, although the children would never live again. She didn’t only hang them, she caged them, used iron maidens, spears, so many different objects. And the whole ‘bathing in blood’ thing, although is technically can be true, that and the whole striking her maid is all exagerrated to add to the story. Her and her husband got off to killing, literally, they liked the screams. If she bathed in blood, it wasn’t to be younger, it was to enjoy their life ending. Not to say she wasn’t vain, but for good reason. She was considered the most beautiful woman in Hungary for all of her days.

And she technically was tried, although as I said before she practically owned the country, they couldn’t actually kill her. But she had killed another young girl of noble blood, and that couldn’t just be set aside. So instead of execution, they sentenced her to house arrest for the rest of her days, unable to punish her for all the women she had killed.

Also, she had three children, and regardless of her murderous ways it was said that she had been a wonderful, loving mother. Strange how the ‘vain blood mistress’ can be more than just, isn’t it?

I could go on and on about this woman, I’ve read and watched basically everything pertaining to her due to reports and essays that I wrote when I was younger, and even though she was a horrifying murderer, she deserves a bit more than ‘blood bitch’.

YES for the accurate commentary!

I researched the hell out of this woman back in the day just for fun because she was just so fascinatingly grotesque to me.  A lot of her methods of torture were things I integrated into my own stories.  Particularly the iron maidens, and pouring freezing water onto the naked bodies of her victims while they were dragged out into the snow.  This woman was scarier than Vlad the Impaler because the things he did were done mostly in order to gain political notoriety  which was a huge asset back in hisday.  Erzebet, however, tortured women for her own sadistic means of entertainment.  She implemented an unsettling brand of eroticism into her methods of torture. She may as well have invented the connotations of the word sanguine. Very few historical figures can give me nightmares quite like she can. 

(via notsufferingfrominsanity)

Source: dollyx

mediterraneum:

 Tomb of Ramses VI, Egypt.

mediterraneum:

 Tomb of Ramses VI, Egypt.

(via martins-brolly)

Source: mediterraneum

wonderous-world:

Through The Gate by  Stephen Bures
Angkor Thom (literally: “Great City”), located in present day Cambodia was the last and most enduring capital city of the Khmer Empire.

wonderous-world:

Through The Gate by  Stephen Bures

Angkor Thom (literally: “Great City”), located in present day Cambodia was the last and most enduring capital city of the Khmer Empire.

(via coattailsofdoom)

Source: wonderous-world

sageoflogic:

valustra:

queerliberationist:

numba1fangirl:

diseasegirl:

silk-ward:

iwitchsistah:


theuppitynegras:


violant-kk:


dimensionsintime:


cutetimmytim:


dimensionsintime:


annespage:


mutantbakabutt:


foreverisreal:


blunts-and-robots:


devils-in-my-head:





this this this this this


if anyone hates me for this you’re not thinking clearly
think about the amount of people killed in the middle east, too ..


lol so edgy xD


the only reason america dropped the atomic bomb was because we were at WAR idiots, if we hadn’t dropped the bomb the war would’ve lasted at lot longer. 9/11 was an act of terrorism, why don’t you go watch a video of the twin towers as they burn after the planes crash into them and later collapse in on themselves burying not only the people that worked there inside, but also the police officers and firefighters who were trying to rescue any survivors, and before they collapsed, when people were forced to choose to burn or jump out to their deaths. so yeah, the atomic bomb killed more people, but one was during WWII and the other was a direct attack of terrorism on America. And the only reason we were at war with Japan was because they attacked us at pearl harbor, if they hadn’t done that the war would’ve stayed in Europe and the atomic bomb wouldn’t have been dropped.


Not even remotely true, but thanks for playing. This misconception largely occurs because of the famous Stimson article that was featured in Harpers’ magazine.
Of course, he didn’t actually WRITE the thing and, though it presents itself as a fireside chat between two people it was actually a heavily engineered document, and almost every fact cited was knowingly wrong by the government at the time (declassified documents - read ‘em). But hey! What better source for info!
That’s neither here nor there though since Japan tried to surrender before we dropped the bomb.
Several Times.
Yes, Japan tried to surrender. Once through Russia, once through Switzerland, once through the Vatican of all places, and many times appealing directly to Truman. We turned them down because of the stipulation that we were not allowed to touch their emperor, a concession the US was not willing to make at the time.


“Foreign Minister Shigemitsu has instructed Ambassador Sato [in Moscow] to find out whether Russia is willing to assist in bringing about a negotiated peace. Shigemitsu’s instructions, although cautiously worded, clearly imply that he has in mind a move by Russia to initiate peace discussions between Japan and the Anglo-Americans… [I]t seems hardly likely that he would have taken such a step without having consulted at least some of the more important members of the new Japanese cabinet… This is the first time that the Japanese have been willing to suggest to Russia directly that they are ready for peace.”
-“Japanese Consider Peace Possibilities” War Department MAGIC reports of intercepted messages: EYES ONLY for President and closest advisers
“I learn from a very reliable source that in important civilian circles in Japan the peace problem is being discussed with increasing anxiety. A speedy German collapse is expected and it is not believed that Japan can then continue the war. It is therefore considered necessary to get peace as soon as possible before the country and towns are destroyed… If any willingness appeared to exist in London the Japanese would be ready for preliminary discussions through Swedish channels. Behind the man who gave me this message stands one of the best known statesment in Japan and there is no doubt that this attempt must be considered as a serious one.”
-Telegram from Swedish minister in Tokyo given from the British Ambassador to the United States
“…It seems probably that very far-reaching conditions would be accepted by the Japanese by way of negotiation… Exchange of the Japanese constituted must also be considered as excluded. The Emperor must not be touched. However, the Imperial power could be somewhat democratized as is that of the English King”
-Report from Swedish minister in Tokyo sent to US State Department
AND EVEN LATER THEY GAVE THOSE CONDITIONS UP
“…Stated that he had been asked by Masutaro Inoue, Counsellor for the Japanese Legation in Portugal, to contact United States representatives. Source quoted Inoue as saying that the Japanese are ready to cease hostilities, provided they are allowed to retain possession of their home islands… On 19 May [1945], the OSS representative reported Inoue again had repeated to source his desire to talk with an American representative. On this occasion Inoue declared that actual peace terms were unimportant so long as the term ‘unconditional surrender’ was not employed.”
-OSS Representative report directly to Truman


Of course, we did anyway. But that’s not important.
Because the bomb wasn’t about Japan.
In Derry and Ramsey’s Memo to Groves (May 12, 1945) when picking a target for the atomic bomb, one of the primary listed reasons for picking a target was:


“making the initial use sufficiently spectacular for the importance of the weapon to be internationally recognized when publicity on it is released.”


In fact, they ranked targets - AA to B. Know what got the lowest ratings? Military targets. The ones that got the highest ratings were civilian ones.
Japan was currently researching wooden planes. WOODEN PLANES. They had attempted to give up, we said no. They had already lost the war when we dropped the bomb. They knew this - hell, they tried to surrender.
So why did we drop the bomb, then?
A close reading of the memo tells all. It was to make an impact on the international community.
Do you know how Truman was first informed about the Manhatten Project and the bomb? It was in a discussion with the Secretary of State in regards to negotiations with Russia after the war.
Truman kept delaying the “Big Three” discussions, the most important political talks in recorded history, until basically the day AFTER the Trinity Tests - he wanted to wait until he knew he had the bomb as a political piece. Stalin and Churchill were VERY angry at him pushing the date back with little to no reason given (they knew, of course, because of spies and intelligence).
Still don’t believe me?
The Secretary of War, and MOST of the army was against dropping the bomb. They wanted to give the option of doing a demonstration and giving Japan an option of total surrender (that we get to do whatever we want with the Emperor) or of giving Japan time to evacuate the civilian population before bombing a city.
Oh, and there’s this from Stimson’s Memo of Talk with Truman (June 6, 1945)


“I told [the President] that I was anxious about this feature of the war for two reasons: first, because I did not want to have the United States get the reputation of outdoing Hitler in atrocities; and second, I was a little fearful that before we could get ready the Air Force might have Japan so thoroughly bombed out that the new weapon would not have a fair background to show its strength. He laughed and said he understood.”


He laughed.
An estimated 500,000 people died between Nagasaki and Hiroshima if you count deaths by radiation poisoning and long-term cancer.
And Truman could only laugh because he was worried the bomb might not be noticeable amongst the wreckage of Japan.
The reason for dropping the bomb was to give America a better condition amongst the international population, particularly Stalin and Russia, in the coming years. It was to make Russia afraid to invade Japan (and from there, the fear was, the rest of Asia) when they knew America had interests in it. They dropped the bomb to give them an advantage when negotiating in the future and to give them a start when everyone began arming (a situation tons of scientists warned everyone about in The Franck Report).
But don’t pretend it was about Japan. And don’t you dare pretend it was about peace.
500,000 people died and all Truman could do was laugh.


I’m rebloggjng this because of the fullness of the information-rich response (the part that actually contains facts, not the rah rah America one)


Bringing this back because it needs to be said and people need reminding.


WHY WAS I NEVER TAUGHT ANYTHING ABOUT THIS
WHY-
I-
The rage and betrayal I feel grows every day knowing I was forced to endure public “education” for 14 years.


YO WHAT DO THEY EVEN TEACH IN HISTORY CLASS??!


White fairy tales.



It never ceases to amaze me as to how little people know about such things.

OK IF THEY’RE NOT GOING TO TEACH US ACTUAL UN-BIASED FACTS THEN WHY DO WE EVEN HAVE HISTORY CLASS
Please do not blame the majority of us Americans for being ignorant. The educational system, the government, and the media to a pretty good job of pulling the wool over our eyes.

“if they aren’t going to teach us actual un-biased facts why do we even have history class”
mandatory education in america is more about instilling an american identity on a wide variety of children from different racial and ethnic minorities, as well as propagandize america as the greatest nation in the world. it is not about increasing knowledge, fighting ignorance, or even about economic attainment. so long as you go through those twelve years and consider yourself a “proud” american, then those history classes have done their job whether they’re accurate or not

oh my god, hiroshima was alderaan

Yes, shockingly enough Star Wars did have some social commentary.

sageoflogic:

valustra:

queerliberationist:

numba1fangirl:

diseasegirl:

silk-ward:

iwitchsistah:

theuppitynegras:

violant-kk:

dimensionsintime:

cutetimmytim:

dimensionsintime:

annespage:

mutantbakabutt:

foreverisreal:

blunts-and-robots:

devils-in-my-head:

image

this this this this this

if anyone hates me for this you’re not thinking clearly

think about the amount of people killed in the middle east, too ..

lol so edgy xD

the only reason america dropped the atomic bomb was because we were at WAR idiots, if we hadn’t dropped the bomb the war would’ve lasted at lot longer. 9/11 was an act of terrorism, why don’t you go watch a video of the twin towers as they burn after the planes crash into them and later collapse in on themselves burying not only the people that worked there inside, but also the police officers and firefighters who were trying to rescue any survivors, and before they collapsed, when people were forced to choose to burn or jump out to their deaths. so yeah, the atomic bomb killed more people, but one was during WWII and the other was a direct attack of terrorism on America. And the only reason we were at war with Japan was because they attacked us at pearl harbor, if they hadn’t done that the war would’ve stayed in Europe and the atomic bomb wouldn’t have been dropped.

Not even remotely true, but thanks for playing. This misconception largely occurs because of the famous Stimson article that was featured in Harpers’ magazine.

Of course, he didn’t actually WRITE the thing and, though it presents itself as a fireside chat between two people it was actually a heavily engineered document, and almost every fact cited was knowingly wrong by the government at the time (declassified documents - read ‘em). But hey! What better source for info!

That’s neither here nor there though since Japan tried to surrender before we dropped the bomb.

Several Times.

Yes, Japan tried to surrender. Once through Russia, once through Switzerland, once through the Vatican of all places, and many times appealing directly to Truman. We turned them down because of the stipulation that we were not allowed to touch their emperor, a concession the US was not willing to make at the time.

“Foreign Minister Shigemitsu has instructed Ambassador Sato [in Moscow] to find out whether Russia is willing to assist in bringing about a negotiated peace. Shigemitsu’s instructions, although cautiously worded, clearly imply that he has in mind a move by Russia to initiate peace discussions between Japan and the Anglo-Americans… [I]t seems hardly likely that he would have taken such a step without having consulted at least some of the more important members of the new Japanese cabinet… This is the first time that the Japanese have been willing to suggest to Russia directly that they are ready for peace.”

-“Japanese Consider Peace Possibilities” War Department MAGIC reports of intercepted messages: EYES ONLY for President and closest advisers

“I learn from a very reliable source that in important civilian circles in Japan the peace problem is being discussed with increasing anxiety. A speedy German collapse is expected and it is not believed that Japan can then continue the war. It is therefore considered necessary to get peace as soon as possible before the country and towns are destroyed… If any willingness appeared to exist in London the Japanese would be ready for preliminary discussions through Swedish channels. Behind the man who gave me this message stands one of the best known statesment in Japan and there is no doubt that this attempt must be considered as a serious one.”

-Telegram from Swedish minister in Tokyo given from the British Ambassador to the United States

“…It seems probably that very far-reaching conditions would be accepted by the Japanese by way of negotiation… Exchange of the Japanese constituted must also be considered as excluded. The Emperor must not be touched. However, the Imperial power could be somewhat democratized as is that of the English King”

-Report from Swedish minister in Tokyo sent to US State Department

AND EVEN LATER THEY GAVE THOSE CONDITIONS UP

“…Stated that he had been asked by Masutaro Inoue, Counsellor for the Japanese Legation in Portugal, to contact United States representatives. Source quoted Inoue as saying that the Japanese are ready to cease hostilities, provided they are allowed to retain possession of their home islands… On 19 May [1945], the OSS representative reported Inoue again had repeated to source his desire to talk with an American representative. On this occasion Inoue declared that actual peace terms were unimportant so long as the term ‘unconditional surrender’ was not employed.”

-OSS Representative report directly to Truman

Of course, we did anyway. But that’s not important.

Because the bomb wasn’t about Japan.

In Derry and Ramsey’s Memo to Groves (May 12, 1945) when picking a target for the atomic bomb, one of the primary listed reasons for picking a target was:

“making the initial use sufficiently spectacular for the importance of the weapon to be internationally recognized when publicity on it is released.”

In fact, they ranked targets - AA to B. Know what got the lowest ratings? Military targets. The ones that got the highest ratings were civilian ones.

Japan was currently researching wooden planes. WOODEN PLANES. They had attempted to give up, we said no. They had already lost the war when we dropped the bomb. They knew this - hell, they tried to surrender.

So why did we drop the bomb, then?

A close reading of the memo tells all. It was to make an impact on the international community.

Do you know how Truman was first informed about the Manhatten Project and the bomb? It was in a discussion with the Secretary of State in regards to negotiations with Russia after the war.

Truman kept delaying the “Big Three” discussions, the most important political talks in recorded history, until basically the day AFTER the Trinity Tests - he wanted to wait until he knew he had the bomb as a political piece. Stalin and Churchill were VERY angry at him pushing the date back with little to no reason given (they knew, of course, because of spies and intelligence).

Still don’t believe me?

The Secretary of War, and MOST of the army was against dropping the bomb. They wanted to give the option of doing a demonstration and giving Japan an option of total surrender (that we get to do whatever we want with the Emperor) or of giving Japan time to evacuate the civilian population before bombing a city.

Oh, and there’s this from Stimson’s Memo of Talk with Truman (June 6, 1945)

“I told [the President] that I was anxious about this feature of the war for two reasons: first, because I did not want to have the United States get the reputation of outdoing Hitler in atrocities; and second, I was a little fearful that before we could get ready the Air Force might have Japan so thoroughly bombed out that the new weapon would not have a fair background to show its strength. He laughed and said he understood.”

He laughed.

An estimated 500,000 people died between Nagasaki and Hiroshima if you count deaths by radiation poisoning and long-term cancer.

And Truman could only laugh because he was worried the bomb might not be noticeable amongst the wreckage of Japan.

The reason for dropping the bomb was to give America a better condition amongst the international population, particularly Stalin and Russia, in the coming years. It was to make Russia afraid to invade Japan (and from there, the fear was, the rest of Asia) when they knew America had interests in it. They dropped the bomb to give them an advantage when negotiating in the future and to give them a start when everyone began arming (a situation tons of scientists warned everyone about in The Franck Report).

But don’t pretend it was about Japan. And don’t you dare pretend it was about peace.

500,000 people died and all Truman could do was laugh.

I’m rebloggjng this because of the fullness of the information-rich response (the part that actually contains facts, not the rah rah America one)

Bringing this back because it needs to be said and people need reminding.

WHY WAS I NEVER TAUGHT ANYTHING ABOUT THIS

WHY-

I-

The rage and betrayal I feel grows every day knowing I was forced to endure public “education” for 14 years.

YO WHAT DO THEY EVEN TEACH IN HISTORY CLASS??!

White fairy tales.

It never ceases to amaze me as to how little people know about such things.

OK IF THEY’RE NOT GOING TO TEACH US ACTUAL UN-BIASED FACTS THEN WHY DO WE EVEN HAVE HISTORY CLASS

Please do not blame the majority of us Americans for being ignorant. The educational system, the government, and the media to a pretty good job of pulling the wool over our eyes.

“if they aren’t going to teach us actual un-biased facts why do we even have history class”

mandatory education in america is more about instilling an american identity on a wide variety of children from different racial and ethnic minorities, as well as propagandize america as the greatest nation in the world. it is not about increasing knowledge, fighting ignorance, or even about economic attainment. so long as you go through those twelve years and consider yourself a “proud” american, then those history classes have done their job whether they’re accurate or not

oh my god, hiroshima was alderaan

Yes, shockingly enough Star Wars did have some social commentary.

Source: pukepurge

Text

maybethings:

seananmcguire:

I re-blogged a picture of a little girl, dressed as Tiana, hugging the face actress who plays Tiana at one of the Disney Parks, and noted that everyone should have their princess.  And a few people have now contacted me basically going “no, only straight white people can have princesses if you stick with the classics.”

Um.

No.

I am a folklorist, and it’s time for some Fun With Folklore.

First off, very few Princesses/fairy tale heroines who are going to become Princesses because that’s what you do are actually defined by specific physical attributes.  You have Snow White, who yes, requires the “skin as white as snow” etc, but that’s to make her an alien beauty and justify the actions of her stepmother.  She belongs to the Aarne-Thompson tale type 709, which is commonly referred to as “Snow White,” but which contains a hell of a lot more, including “Bella Venezia”, “Myrsina”, “Nourie Hadig” and “Gold-Tree and Silver-Tree.”  All those links will take you to Wikipedia.  Click them.  Note that NOT ONE of those girls is defined by her appearance, beyond “incredibly beautiful.”  “Nourie Hadig” is Armenian in origin; you can bet that girl was not white as snow.  (Note that I do not actually care for the “Nourie Hadig” 709 variant, due to using a Roma girl as the main adversary, but that’s another story.)  Any story you want to tell is going to have variants where the heroines are never described!  You know why?

BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO WERE TELLING THESE STORIES UNDERSTOOD THAT IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR CHILDREN TO SEE THEMSELVES IN THE MIRROR OF THE TALE.

There are fairy tales about people with disabilities, ranging from the physical (missing limbs, missing eyes, missing tongues) to the emotional (girls who cannot smile, boys who cannot feel fear).  There are fairy tales that end in same-sex marriage.  There’s even an excellent fairy tale about gender identity, “The Princess Who Became A Prince,” in which our hero has always felt he was a boy, but tried to be a dutiful daughter, until a dragon stole a neighbor princess and he had to ride to rescue the girl in order to save the kingdom.  One misaimed curse later, and wham, our new-minted prince is finally outwardly as he had been all along on the inside.

THIS IS JUST AS OLD AND TRUE AND SCHOLASTIC AS CINDERELLA AND THE OTHERS.

The “big fairy tales” of today are the ones that someone seized on as marketable.  We have the power, as drivers of media, to say that we want more diversity.  We want Princesses of every race, creed, and religion, and we have the folklore and fairy tales to make them real.  We want our transgender Princess (although wow would the marketing be problematic).  Saying “the classics” are 100% about straight white people reduces the past to a place where only straight whiteness existed, and where no other children ever needed stories.  And that’s not what the past was.

Once upon a time has never stopped being right now.

/applause

(via anotherseason)

Source: seananmcguire

Text

15hypens:

in 7th grade we had this german teacher who immigrated to america from Germany about 23 years ago and one guy in my class thought it would be funny to ask him “Hey, because you’re german does that make you a Nazi?” and in a very thick german accent he replies “Hey, because you’re a white american boy, does that make you a slaveholder?” and the kid never tried to be funny in that class again

(via greenisinnocent)

Source: 15hypens

elcomfortador:

Wait, so all you people up in arms about how Disney made Merida too sexy and “princessy” know that this is what Pocahontas looked like, right? And that she was real? And that she died of disease at age 22? And that she wasn’t friends with Snow White, right?

elcomfortador:

Wait, so all you people up in arms about how Disney made Merida too sexy and “princessy” know that this is what Pocahontas looked like, right? And that she was real? And that she died of disease at age 22? And that she wasn’t friends with Snow White, right?

Source: elcomfortador

aniseshaw:

‘The Great Gatsby’ Still Gets Flappers Wrong

Through their writings, Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald—the young, glamorous literary couple du jour—defined the Jazz Age as we know it. Scott declared his Southern belle wife, whom he married in 1920, “the first American flapper.” The inspiration for Daisy Buchanan in “The Great Gatsby,” Zelda was known for her wild antics, like drunkenly jumping, fully clothed, into the fountain at New York’s Plaza Hotel. Even as a kid, she was always creating a scene: She stole a car when she was 8; she went swimming in a flesh-colored bathing suit in her teens…. 
But Zelda, as fearless and trail-blazing as she was, can’t even embody the flapper movement fully. For one, it was not all white women, as NYU’s Modern America reports: “For the time being, the bob and the entire Flapper wardrobe, united blacks and whites under a common hip-culture.” Secondly, the flapper’s rebellion against Victorian sexual mores didn’t start among the high-society debutantes, but in “working-class neighborhoods and radical circles in the early 1900s before it spread to middle-class youth and college campuses.”

Pictured: African American Flappers at a football game in Washington D.C. from the Smithsonian Institute.

aniseshaw:

‘The Great Gatsby’ Still Gets Flappers Wrong

Through their writings, Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald—the young, glamorous literary couple du jour—defined the Jazz Age as we know it. Scott declared his Southern belle wife, whom he married in 1920, “the first American flapper.” The inspiration for Daisy Buchanan in “The Great Gatsby,” Zelda was known for her wild antics, like drunkenly jumping, fully clothed, into the fountain at New York’s Plaza Hotel. Even as a kid, she was always creating a scene: She stole a car when she was 8; she went swimming in a flesh-colored bathing suit in her teens…. 

But Zelda, as fearless and trail-blazing as she was, can’t even embody the flapper movement fully. For one, it was not all white women, as NYU’s Modern America reports: “For the time being, the bob and the entire Flapper wardrobe, united blacks and whites under a common hip-culture.” Secondly, the flapper’s rebellion against Victorian sexual mores didn’t start among the high-society debutantes, but in “working-class neighborhoods and radical circles in the early 1900s before it spread to middle-class youth and college campuses.”

Pictured: African American Flappers at a football game in Washington D.C. from the Smithsonian Institute.

(via gorgonetta)

Source: aniseshaw