Photoset

rifa:

literatenonsense:

exgynocraticgrrl:

Malcolm X: Our History Was Destroyed By Slavery 

on March 17, 1963 in Chicago.

see how little we get taught about history - I never had any idea why Malcolm X used the ‘X’. 

How come I didn’t know this

Also that crusty old white man called the named ‘gifted’. Jesus.

I love how he thinks a gift works. Taking a thing people already have, which they like, and replacing it with something they don’t want, but which you like. “Ah I see you like the films of Werner Hertzog. Well I like the romcoms of Cameron Diaz, so I’m taking your Werner Hertzog DVDs away from you and replacing them with romcoms. It’s a gift. You’re welcome. (Oh and I’m also going to work you to death and refuse to acknowledge you are a human being or have any real emotional or mental existence. That’s also a gift.) I’m so nice!”

(via slashfilled-mind)

Photo
coelasquid:

alliartist:

rifa:

prokopetz:

nebcondist1:

prokopetz:

I’ve seen this image going around, and I feel compelled to point out that it’s only half-right. It’s true that high heels were originally a masculine fashion, but they weren’t originally worn by butchers - nor for any other utilitarian purpose, for that matter.
High heels were worn by men for exactly the same reason they’re worn by women today: to display one’s legs to best effect. Until quite recently, shapely, well-toned calves and thighs were regarded as an absolute prerequisite for male attractiveness. That’s why you see so many paintings of famous men framed to show off their legs - like this one of George Washington displaying his fantastic calves:

… or this one of Louis XIV of France rocking a fabulous pair of red platform heels (check out those thighs!):

… or even this one of Charles I of England showing off his high-heeled riding boots - note, again, the visual emphasis on his well-formed calves:

In summary: were high heels originally worn by men? Yes. Were they worn to keep blood off their feet? No at all - they were worn for the same reason they’re worn today: to look fabulous.

so then how did they become a solo feminine item of attire?

A variety of reasons. In France, for example, high heels fell out out of favour in the court of Napoleon due to their association with aristocratic decadence, while in England, the more conservative fashions of the Victorian era regarded it as indecent for a man to openly display his calves.
But then, fashions come and go. The real question is why heels never came back into fashion for men - and that can be laid squarely at the feet of institutionalised homophobia. Essentially, heels for men were never revived because, by the early 20th Century, sexually provocative attire for men had come to be associated with homosexuality; the resulting moral panic ushered in an era of drab, blocky, fully concealing menswear in which a well-turned calf simply had no place - a setback from which men’s fashion has yet to fully recover.

FASHION HISTORY IS HUMAN HISTORY OK

Thank you, history side of tumblr. That “stay out of blood” thing has been driving me mad.

It’s funny because men’s cowboy boots and motorcycle boots both have relatively high heels (at least as high as the heels in those earlier art examples). I had an old teacher who was a little 5’2” bodybuilder that always wore cowboy boots and we would rib him that they were “acceptably masculine high heels” and that kind of thing. They seem to pass under the radar because they’re attached to such chest-poundingly masculine pastimes, they’re like the footwear version of “No homo”.

Side note: butchers floors are not covered in blood. I don’t know how you think butchery works, but that’s not it. The only time there’s any blood involved is right after slaughtering, when the carcass is hung to drain the blood. This does not go on the floor. Certainly not in the Western Early Modern period when heels first became a thing. It goes in a bowl. How rich do you think these butchers are that they can afford to throw away all the nutrition in blood? You make blood sausage. Did you think the blood for black pudding was mopped of the floor with a rag that they then rung into the sausage mix? And after the draining process, there’s no blood involved at all. That red stuff you something get in packets of ready prepared raw meat isn’t blood, it’s meat juices, which are a different thing. Butchering involves little blood, and none of it goes on the floor, unless they’re really clumsy.

coelasquid:

alliartist:

rifa:

prokopetz:

nebcondist1:

prokopetz:

I’ve seen this image going around, and I feel compelled to point out that it’s only half-right. It’s true that high heels were originally a masculine fashion, but they weren’t originally worn by butchers - nor for any other utilitarian purpose, for that matter.

High heels were worn by men for exactly the same reason they’re worn by women today: to display one’s legs to best effect. Until quite recently, shapely, well-toned calves and thighs were regarded as an absolute prerequisite for male attractiveness. That’s why you see so many paintings of famous men framed to show off their legs - like this one of George Washington displaying his fantastic calves:

… or this one of Louis XIV of France rocking a fabulous pair of red platform heels (check out those thighs!):

… or even this one of Charles I of England showing off his high-heeled riding boots - note, again, the visual emphasis on his well-formed calves:

In summary: were high heels originally worn by men? Yes. Were they worn to keep blood off their feet? No at all - they were worn for the same reason they’re worn today: to look fabulous.

so then how did they become a solo feminine item of attire?

A variety of reasons. In France, for example, high heels fell out out of favour in the court of Napoleon due to their association with aristocratic decadence, while in England, the more conservative fashions of the Victorian era regarded it as indecent for a man to openly display his calves.

But then, fashions come and go. The real question is why heels never came back into fashion for men - and that can be laid squarely at the feet of institutionalised homophobia. Essentially, heels for men were never revived because, by the early 20th Century, sexually provocative attire for men had come to be associated with homosexuality; the resulting moral panic ushered in an era of drab, blocky, fully concealing menswear in which a well-turned calf simply had no place - a setback from which men’s fashion has yet to fully recover.

FASHION HISTORY IS HUMAN HISTORY OK

Thank you, history side of tumblr. That “stay out of blood” thing has been driving me mad.

It’s funny because men’s cowboy boots and motorcycle boots both have relatively high heels (at least as high as the heels in those earlier art examples). I had an old teacher who was a little 5’2” bodybuilder that always wore cowboy boots and we would rib him that they were “acceptably masculine high heels” and that kind of thing. They seem to pass under the radar because they’re attached to such chest-poundingly masculine pastimes, they’re like the footwear version of “No homo”.

Side note: butchers floors are not covered in blood. I don’t know how you think butchery works, but that’s not it. The only time there’s any blood involved is right after slaughtering, when the carcass is hung to drain the blood. This does not go on the floor. Certainly not in the Western Early Modern period when heels first became a thing. It goes in a bowl. How rich do you think these butchers are that they can afford to throw away all the nutrition in blood? You make blood sausage. Did you think the blood for black pudding was mopped of the floor with a rag that they then rung into the sausage mix? And after the draining process, there’s no blood involved at all. That red stuff you something get in packets of ready prepared raw meat isn’t blood, it’s meat juices, which are a different thing. Butchering involves little blood, and none of it goes on the floor, unless they’re really clumsy.

(via aniralurks)

Photo
thedesureich:

ruinleon:

a snake wearing a top hat and mustache that is all

ah mr sneky,i see u r wering ur fance top

thedesureich:

ruinleon:

a snake wearing a top hat and mustache that is all

ah mr sneky,i see u r wering ur fance top

(via thewerewolvesareheretosaveus)

Photoset

iwriteaboutfeminism:

Police continue to make arrests at Ferguson protest.

Part 4.

(via aniralurks)

Photo
potootagath:

wingleader:

wakeupslaves:

the-goddamazon:

LOL man.

never forget white people did nothing first neither the best, they sleep and eat false propaganda,

Ugh, why the shit does that have to turn into a race thing? Why does EVERYTHING have to turn into a race thing?

because white people have made sure that everything is about race
as proved by the fact that when you say explorer, you think of a bunch of white guys walking the world and discovering it ~exotic wonders~ even though Zheng He travelled through Asia, to the Middle East, and even East Africa. But you’d likely never heard of him before.
Same reason you never heard of Ahmad Ibn Fadlan, an Arab traveller who, as early as the 10th century, went to the Volga area for diplomatic reasons. He wrote about it, much as Marco Polo would do later for his own travels, and is one of our sources on what viking were like (and by all accounts, he wrote about them more accurately than western scholars of the same period did)
Oh, or Ibn Battuta who travelled throughout Africa long before europeans did, and even went to Europe himself.
And that’s just some example of Muslim medieval travel writers
Everything is about race because white people keep telling everyone that their race is the only one who every got anything done.

So I totally agree with the whole European/White bias in the teaching of exploration, and all that jazz.
My question here though is: why is Zheng He’s boat being bigger than Columbus’s a good thing? They’re just different types of boats. They were obviously both seaworthy and capable of carrying people, of whatever nationalities, to places they hadn’t previously been. They are therefore equal in terms of both explorerness and boatness.
(I’d like to stress, I’m talking specifically about the boats here, not the men.)

potootagath:

wingleader:

wakeupslaves:

the-goddamazon:

LOL man.

never forget white people did nothing first neither the best, they sleep and eat false propaganda,

Ugh, why the shit does that have to turn into a race thing? Why does EVERYTHING have to turn into a race thing?

because white people have made sure that everything is about race

as proved by the fact that when you say explorer, you think of a bunch of white guys walking the world and discovering it ~exotic wonders~ even though Zheng He travelled through Asia, to the Middle East, and even East Africa. But you’d likely never heard of him before.

Same reason you never heard of Ahmad Ibn Fadlan, an Arab traveller who, as early as the 10th century, went to the Volga area for diplomatic reasons. He wrote about it, much as Marco Polo would do later for his own travels, and is one of our sources on what viking were like (and by all accounts, he wrote about them more accurately than western scholars of the same period did)

Oh, or Ibn Battuta who travelled throughout Africa long before europeans did, and even went to Europe himself.

And that’s just some example of Muslim medieval travel writers

Everything is about race because white people keep telling everyone that their race is the only one who every got anything done.

So I totally agree with the whole European/White bias in the teaching of exploration, and all that jazz.

My question here though is: why is Zheng He’s boat being bigger than Columbus’s a good thing? They’re just different types of boats. They were obviously both seaworthy and capable of carrying people, of whatever nationalities, to places they hadn’t previously been. They are therefore equal in terms of both explorerness and boatness.

(I’d like to stress, I’m talking specifically about the boats here, not the men.)

(Source: romancingalbion, via xxxcinnamon)

Text

sp0rty:

sageruto:

sheldon just suggested that some people may be born without the disposition for sexual attraction and a laugh tracked played ????????????????????????????? stop this

make big bang theory illegal right now effective immediately

(via iwishiwasatraveler)

Photoset

not-safe-for-earth:

mikaverleth:

#”damn fucking right i did”

(Source: odnson, via athenakeene)

Text

analish:

do you ever have those times at 4am where you get so motivated and decide to get all your shit together and then plan out your entire life and future and then the next morning you’re just like lol

(via iwishiwasatraveler)

Photoset
Text

americachavez:

do you ever read a fic that is so much better than the actual canon that you get angry

(via jamysketches)