"And how should I presume?"

The unsophisticated ramblings of an unenlightened twenty-something who hopes to, one day, change the world.


Cast of characters:

The Anna to my Elsa (and tag)
The Michael to my Wendy Darling (and tag)
The Wash to my Zoe (and tag)
The John to my Sherlock
The Keladry to my Alanna
The Mal to my Zoe


This Journal Is QUILTBAG Positive

This Journal Is Sex Work Positive

This Journal Is Body Positive

This Journal Is Positive

Posts I Like
Folks I Follow
Posts tagged "homophobia"

the-navel-treatment:

the-navel-treatment:

The next time I see the “it wasn’t canon argument,” I’m going to run screaming at you with copies of the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885 and news articles detailing the treatment of convicted homosexuals in 19th Century England, and then continue screaming until you understand exactly what would have happened to Arthur Conan Doyle had he explicitly written Sherlock Holmes and John Watson as gay lovers. 

So, I wrote this a bit cheekily last night, but now I want to expand on it with some actual facts.  I see a lot of people saying, “Oh, back in the 19th century, Sherlock and John couldn’t openly be together.” And that’s true, but what’s at the heart of that sentiment is this one, “Arthur Conan Doyle couldn’t have written them openly together, because the general public would assume he was encouraging homosexuality, perhaps was even homosexual himself, and that would have been dangerous.” Here’s why.

In 1885, the British Parliament enacted section 11 of the he Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885, known as the Labouchere Amendment which prohibited gross indecency between males. It thus became possible to prosecute homosexuals for engaging in sexual acts where buggery or attempted buggery could not be proven. Note that they didn’t have to actually catch you in the act, they just had to suspect that you did it. During this time period, many notable men were prosecuted with disastrous results; Lord Arthur Chilton committed suicide after being implicated in Boulton and Park trial involving two transvestites and Oscar Wilde was sentences to prison and hard labour after being found guilty.

Was there still a homosexual culture in England at the time? Yes, it was around this time that the movement began to flourish, with clandestine gatherings preceding the opening of the first gay pub, The Cave of the Golden Calf in 1912There was even the beginnings of gay erotica and publishing, but it was still very much subversive and not opening distributed among the public.

The opposite of who Arthur Conan Doyle was; Sherlock Holmes increased subscriptions to The Strand magazine by 30,000. While Oscar Wilde, if not embraced, accepted, the consequences of his actions, Arthur Conan Doyle was not in a position to do that. He received a knighthood in 1902, he was involved in political campaigns and other civic work throughout his lifetime, and he had 5 children to support. He was not in a position to risk what an accusation of buggery would bring.

So, when you look at the situation, Arthur Conan Doyle was unable to go any farther than he had with Holmes and Watson in his original stories. Even if he wanted to. Even if he tried to fill it with as much subtext as possible, he would always have to be mindful of what would happen if he went to far.

This is why this argument bothers me so much. Were Sherlock Holmes in John Watson explicitly in a romantic relationship in the original stories? No, and no one is arguing that they were. Are we intended to imply, with the clues that were safe to include given the environment at the time, that it’s a possibility? That’s up to you to decide. But demanding that the only way a relationship could be legitimate is if it had been clearly stated by Arthur Conan Doyle is frustrating because it’s imposing today’s standards on a time period where they do not fit. 

(via andiblossom)

lgbtlaughs:

How To Talk To Your Kids About Ellen Page

stephaniebrownisback:

And I would rather have a pincushion handle political decisions for my area than you. :3

Read the whole article. It’s a veritable cornucopia of homophobic and misogynistic fuckery.

(via vantwinblade)

witchyredhead:

Ellen Page’s awesome response to a homophobic pastor who wrote to her.

Any story dealing, however seriously, with homosexual love is taken to be a story about homosexuality while stories dealing with heterosexual love are seen as stories about the individual people they portray. This is as much a problem today for American filmmakers who cannot conceive of the presence of gay characters in a film unless the specific subject of the film is homosexuality. Lesbians and gay men are thereby classified as purely sexual creatures, people defined solely by their sexual urges.

Vito Russo, The Celluloid Closet: Homosexuality in the Movies (Chapter 4)

The sad thing, folks, is that this book was written in 1981 and revised in the 1990s, and over thirty years later this hasn’t really changed.

(via kellerprocess)

(via ilikechampagne)

broadway:

ilikebroadwaythings:

wait this is why the Broadway community is literally amazing.

They made a video in response to the Russian government shutting down their theater productions. Full story on Broadwayworld here (x)

ALSO IT HAS EVERY BROADWAY PERSON YOU WANT.

and its pretty funny, enjoy!

Now this is why I love Broadway. These people take the time to come together and rehearse and design this, while making it funny while also making a statement. I highly recommend everyone watch this, even if you’re not a broadway person!

(via thatchickwiththebook)

elfjor:

moosezekiel:

thwhitewolff:

WAY TO GO ALLSTATE

THATS ALLSTATE’S STAND
ARE YOU IN GOOD HANDS?

I LOVE THIS SO MUCH LIKE YES

elfjor:

moosezekiel:

thwhitewolff:

WAY TO GO ALLSTATE

THATS ALLSTATE’S STAND

ARE YOU IN GOOD HANDS?

I LOVE THIS SO MUCH LIKE YES

(via onceuponapotter)

iprotectthethingsilove:

this.

#im just not over someone being ten when i kissed a girl came out tbh
2008, so 1998, so 15ish/as old as my baby brother.
Sweet Jesus.

iprotectthethingsilove:

this.

2008, so 1998, so 15ish/as old as my baby brother.

Sweet Jesus.

(via alackofpetticoats)

assholeofday:

Asshole of the Day for December 30, 2013: Phil Robertson

by TeaPartyCat ()

Phil Robertson became a national figure two weeks ago when his comments against gays and civil rights became public. A&E suspended him, then rescinded the suspension before it mattered even one bit— perhaps to drive sales of merchandise during Christmas.

In his wake three more people were named Asshole of the Day for their ridiculous responses:

And now more comments have come out. These ones saying girls should be able to cook, carry a Bible, and marry at age 15. Really.

“Make sure that she can cook a meal, you need to eat some meals that she cooks, check that out,” he said. “Make sure she carries her Bible. That’ll save you a lot of trouble down the road. And if she picks your ducks, now, that’s a woman.”

“They got to where they’re getting hard to find,” Robertson remarked. “Mainly because these boys are waiting until they get to be about 20 years old before they marry ‘em. Look, you wait until they get to be 20 years old, the only picking that’s going to take place is your pocket.”

The Duck Commander company founder added: “You got to marry these girls when they are about 15 or 16, they’ll pick your ducks. You need to check with mom and dad about that of course.”

For a man who professes to love like it says to in the Bible, he really doesn’t seem to understand Jesus’s commandment to do unto others as you would have them do unto you, unless he thinks it’s fine for one of his granddaughters to get married to an older man at 15 and be relegated to cooking. Or is he one of those assholes like Rob Portman who opposes gay marriage until it turns out his son is gay? In this case he’d change his mind if it’s HIS 15-year-old relative. In any event, I’m tired of bigots and sexists hiding their prejudice behind the Bible. Time for assholes like this to accept that they live in the modern world and deal with it.

It is Phil Robertson’s 2nd time being named Asshole of the Day. His previous win was for his anti-gay and racist comments to GQ magazine.

Full story: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/12/29/duck-dynasty-star-girls-should-carry-a-bible-cook-and-marry-when-they-are-15/

(via truth-has-a-liberal-bias)

"If you think homosexuality is an unnatural condition, I cannot agree with you."
Kevin Rudd smashes a pastor’s views on marriage equality on Q&A [x]

(via unlikeanyoneelse)

The fact of the matter is, it doesn’t matter whether or not you think homosexuality is a sin. Let me say that again. It does not matter if you think homosexuality is a sin, or if you think it is simply another expression of human love. It doesn’t matter. Why doesn’t it matter? Because people are dying. Kids are literally killing themselves because they are so tired of being rejected and dehumanized that they feel their only option left is to end their life. As a Youth Pastor, this makes me physically ill. And as a human, it should make you feel the same way. So, I’m through with the debate.

When faced with the choice between being theologically correct…as if this is even possible…and being morally responsible, I’ll go with morally responsible every time.