sometimes

izanzanwin:

What I think of every time I see a “Sexy Pocahontas” or romanticized rendition of “Pocahontas and John Smith”. 

izanzanwin:

What I think of every time I see a “Sexy Pocahontas” or romanticized rendition of “Pocahontas and John Smith”. 

(via grrspit)

airships-and-swords:

theracismrepellent:

go0fnugget:

During WWII, Japanese American soldiers were among the first to liberate the Nazi concentration camp in Dachau, Germany. “U.S military commanders decided it would be bad public relations if Jewish prisoners were freed by Japanese American soldiers whose own families were imprisoned in American concentration camps,” therefore, these Japanese American soldiers who liberated hundreds of Jews are missing in our history lessons.

Wow. 

See, that implies that our history lessons actually talk about the fact that our government put Japanese Americans IN camps - and that by our silence we LET them. We condoned it. That’s on the heads of every white person who stood silently by and said nothing.
Also, yeah, not regularly taught.

airships-and-swords:

theracismrepellent:

go0fnugget:

During WWII, Japanese American soldiers were among the first to liberate the Nazi concentration camp in Dachau, Germany. “U.S military commanders decided it would be bad public relations if Jewish prisoners were freed by Japanese American soldiers whose own families were imprisoned in American concentration camps,” therefore, these Japanese American soldiers who liberated hundreds of Jews are missing in our history lessons.

Wow. 

See, that implies that our history lessons actually talk about the fact that our government put Japanese Americans IN camps - and that by our silence we LET them. We condoned it. That’s on the heads of every white person who stood silently by and said nothing.

Also, yeah, not regularly taught.

(via grrspit)

readyokaygo:

Atheists realize that very few wars are actually dogmatically fought for a religion, right? If any at all. Most “religious wars” are actually power struggles or imperialist ventures where religion is used by a state, movement, or actor as a vessel, tool for social mobilization, or political opportunity to wage a war.

(via jadelyn)

ayellowbirds:

perseidbadger:

duckindolans:

Where did this horror movie thing of mummies walking come from was it just some racist weird western notion to further exotify Egypt?? Did anyone actually believe this before The Mummy (the really old version) came out in the 20’s?

Buckle up, y’all, I wrote my thesis on this so I actually know the answer to it. Please take a moment to prepare yourself for white people being even grosser than you thought we were. No, grosser. NO, grosser than that. Okay, you’re ready. 

Of course, many cultures have myths about the dead rising up, but the mummy occupies a really unique place in the Western imagination. As far as we can tell, Western anxieties about Egyptian mummies didn’t appear until until the Early Modern period of European history. During this time, Europeans had some…interesting ideas about medicine. Some of these ideas involved straight-up fucking cannibalism. Yep! Mummy parts were crumbled up and used as tinctures or ingested, most frequently to stanch internal bleeding. It wasn’t until people began to realize that eating other humans might contribute to the spread of disease that the practice died out. It’s very probable that fears & anxieties about Egyptian mummies specifically came from their association with disease.

Egyptian mummies continued to be used as raw material up to and throughout the 19th century; they were used to make paint pigment and paper, and some people claim they were also used as fertilizer and fuel. (The last part is almost certainly not true, because the “fuel” thing comes from a Mark Twain joke that subsequent writers took seriously.) They were also the subject of Pettigrew’s famous mummy demonstrations, in which a greasy amateur scientist and showman unrolled mummies in front of London high society. They were ALSO taken into people’s private homes and treated as curios - having looted artifacts was considered a sign of refinement and good personal curatorship. 

Despite treating mummies as objects and resources, the Victorians must have known on some level that desecrating corpses was not 100% okay, because it’s around this time that we start to see mummy fictions. 

Including Victorian mummy  erotica.

Mummy fictions in the 19th century mostly focused on romantic conquest of the mummy, but there was an element of horror in them too; in these fictions (including ones by Bram Stoker and Arthur Conan Doyle, among others) we see a lot of fear & anxiety about the mystical powers of the mummy, which I’m pretty sure comes from Englishmen feeling vaguely guilty about having dead people in their houses. (Not guilty enough to put them back, though!) EDIT: if you’re wondering where, specifically, the idea of mummies walking is from, it’s from these stories.

As mummy romance fell out of vogue, the accompanying horror element stayed. When the tomb of Tutankhamun was opened in 1922 and a series of unfortunate events conspired to make people believe in a curse, Western anxieties about the mummy skyrocketed, and birthed the mummy-horror tradition we see today.

Of course, all of this history IS absolutely rooted in racism and exotification; as I said in my thesis: 

It is tempting to dismiss the use and abuse of mummified bodies as a quirk of history, an unusual and unrepeatable phase of Western culture. However, to do so would be to dismiss years of imperialism, of colonialist thought, in which people of “the Orient” - a category in which Egypt was definitively included - existed in the Western imagination as curios, commodities, and curiosities, not as human beings.

This concludes the super long answer that no one asked for or wanted. If you take away anything from this, I hope it’s that if you’re European, your great-great-great grandfather was probably a cannibal and your great-grandma was probably into mummy porn. Sweet dreams!

Oh hey, I forgot most people didn’t know this one. Yeah, white folks did some awful, awful stuff with the Egyptian dead. There’s a reason that there’s so few still around, in spite of the popularity of mummification as a funerary practice over centuries of Khemetic civilization.

(via moniquill)

the idea of having life-changing experiences is so overrated and misunderstood. i have had plenty life-changing experiences and they aren’t always good. 

lancrebitch:

quimbycub:


willow-wanderings:

nedahoyin:

queenqueerqutie:


Martin Bauendahl

Real life vs Societal expectations

Wow..

Yeah, news flash people, boobs generally only look “perky” while in a bra. A few are super lucky and have naturally perky boobs, most don’t. And this is because, SURPRISE, boobs are intended to feed babies and it’s hard for a baby being cradled in mum’s arm to reach a nipple that’s on the other side of the boob from where its mouth is.Think of a soda fountain machine. The spouts are all pointing down, right? So you can put soda in a cup being held under the spout? If the spout was sticking straight out, it would be really hard to get a soda out of it.Babies need to be able to reach a nipple easily so they can eat. Ergo, nipples are usually lower and angled more downward on a naturally hanging boob, both so it’s easier for a baby to reach and so gravity can do its part in pulling milk toward the nipple.So there you go, outright ANATOMICAL proof that boobs are not there for the benefit of men.

Thank you for that. I never realized. Thanks.


I never thought about the position of nipples. huh.

lancrebitch:

quimbycub:

willow-wanderings:

nedahoyin:

queenqueerqutie:

Martin Bauendahl

Real life vs Societal expectations

Wow..

Yeah, news flash people, boobs generally only look “perky” while in a bra. A few are super lucky and have naturally perky boobs, most don’t. And this is because, SURPRISE, boobs are intended to feed babies and it’s hard for a baby being cradled in mum’s arm to reach a nipple that’s on the other side of the boob from where its mouth is.

Think of a soda fountain machine. The spouts are all pointing down, right? So you can put soda in a cup being held under the spout? If the spout was sticking straight out, it would be really hard to get a soda out of it.

Babies need to be able to reach a nipple easily so they can eat. Ergo, nipples are usually lower and angled more downward on a naturally hanging boob, both so it’s easier for a baby to reach and so gravity can do its part in pulling milk toward the nipple.
So there you go, outright ANATOMICAL proof that boobs are not there for the benefit of men.

Thank you for that. I never realized. Thanks.

I never thought about the position of nipples. huh.

(Source: denicedenice)

stfueverything:

dbvictoria:

With all the heat Anita Sarkeesian gets for her Tropes series, you’d think it was a new topic, but Gene Siskel & Roger Ebert had a discussion on a similar theme when they were talking about the influx of slasher movies on their show in 1980.

(x)

34 years later and this is STILL relevant

(via lancrebitch)

ethiopienne:

odinsblog:

ruckawriter:

worldoflis:

girldwarf:

Deconstructing Masculinity & Manhood with Michael Kimmel @ Dartmouth College

YAAAAEEESSSSSSS

You know what I like, and feel is so important? That he doesn’t say “Men thinks those are THEIR positions”. He says “We think those are OUR positions.”

As a male feminist, he still doesn’t exclude himself from the group of men.

Damn.

Well said.

We are (still) living in the age of the angry White male…who, unironically, is the beneficiary of 99.999% of society’s benefits 

also laughing real hard about the fact that he said this at dartmouth, which is pretty much the capital of Angry Entitled White Man Land

(Source: exgynocraticgrrl)

africamustrise:

Before and After Colonisation

The British, referred to the ingenuity and resourcefulness of the Congolese people as ‘Primitive’ because they respected the land they lived on and understand the harmony that mankind and nature must abide by. In cultivating Palm trees, they only took what was needed for themselves to feed their families, and constructed a simple but efficient system of refining palms into oil and other products for many different purposes.

The British observed  and studied their technique, in their greed they decided to make it into a mass production enterprise, one explorer stated “buried in their jungle, they were too backward to realise the vast inheritance it had to offer, the untapped resources of their vast continent…wealth lay wasting”

It is by this same so called ‘primitive’ invention that they sought out to make profit from Palm (Palm Trees only grow in Tropical climates so the English knew nothing on how to cultivate and process it) they took the  invention of the Congolese and  enforced their system of capitalism in their country to fund their industrial ‘revolution’, producing more than was necessary, raping the land, causing major issues such as deforestation, habitat degradation, climate change, animal cruelty and for the vast majority if not all of the profits to be enjoyed in their own countries.

They then spread propaganda wordlwide; ‘the savages lived in darkness’ ‘we found them swinging from trees’ ‘we saved them from  themselves’, ‘we civilised them’ and etc

They made it larger scale, a little tweak there, a little alteration here, and the white man has the audacity to herald himself as an inventor.

Making alterations to a pre-existing system/product whilst keeping the core technique does not make you an inventor. Its called Plagiarism.

(via dynamicafrica)