thesixpennybook:

perlaret:

i feel really weird about the word “identify” and how it’s used lately

I feel this. personally I feel like it’s because tumblr/radiqueer/pomo identity discourse seems to hold at the same time an unspoken idea of an individual as completely free to wander in and out of equally completely independent spheres of meaning, and an unspoken idea of an individual as being inherently one thing or another thing on a kind of soul level completely apart from social context, which despite being completely invisible and intangible is more meaningful than their tangible modes of existence.

it’s almost like an atheistic form of gnosticism; the real truth about the self is on a higher plane reachable only through special knowledge, and it is indicative of lesser knowledge to be concerned with things on the physical plane. ‘identify’ indicates your knowledge of your special soul-plane self- in tumblr politics, you could ‘identify’ as being a butch lesbian, and if people point out that in reality you are male, stereotypically effeminate, and you date other men, they are oppressing you and demonstrating their inferior knowledge.

while I believe that my sexuality is an immutable part of my being, I understand myself as a lesbian materially both in terms of my biology (my ‘gay gene’/whatever formative processes wired up my brain to look for hot chicks/who knows but I’m a mammal and my sexuality is what my body does) and in terms of my social positionality. it is a fact about me that other people can empirically determine that I have a girlfriend, that if I did not I would be seeking only to date women, that I dress and style myself in ways indicative of my place in lesbian subculture, etc etc. I am a lesbian because I do lesbian things, because ‘lesbian’ is the word for women who are like me in certain specific ways, not because I ‘identify’ as a lesbian.

obviously in some cases there can be disconnects between one’s interior sense of self and one’s positionality, and positionality can shift on micro and macro levels (eg. many butches get mistaken for men in a brief or more sustained manner, moving countries may alter how a person is perceived racially, etc), but to claim that the interior sense and only the interior sense is really true is to ultimately lose all grip on anything on a broader social scale, particularly the ability to do class-based political organising. there’s a reason why there is no real boundary, only a sliding scale, between the ‘I identify as queer because I am heterosexual in a slightly unusual way’ crowd and the ‘I identify as a gryphon and Daenerys Targaryen is my headmate’ crowd.

tl;dr ‘I identify as…’ is basically code for ‘I am the worst kind of existentialist’.

my coworker told me they’re starting to clean up my neighbor’s house next door. they’re hoarders and we’ve been getting problems with mice because of them. 

[Cersei] even decided to bust Brienne’s chops over Jaime - a man she no longer even seems to be interested in herself. It’s worth noting too that the series has landed down firmly on the “Brienne secretly loves Jaime” side of the fence, which weakens her character if you ask me.

ign.com (via nochanceandnochoice)

Really doe?  Like one of the biggest reasons that Brienne followed Renly was because she was in love with him and he showed her kindness by dancing with her when no one else would.  That is why she was a kick ass warrior and was willing to die for him.  She was still kick ass in love with Renly.   Why is it a stretch for her to fall in love with Jaime when he did much more for her than dancing?  He saved her from being raped.  He saved her from a bear by putting his body on the line.  He told her things he never told another soul.  And he’s fucking handsome as all get out too.

It doesn’t make her less kick ass to be in love with him.  Just means she’s a human being with human feelings who has fallen in love.  

(via miltonsong)

I hate how so many people equate love with femininity and therefore weakness. 

(via corinnestark)

Or even more accurately with women who aren’t traditional love interests as not being as bad ass if they are in love or the insistence that this has to be a brotp because she is not traditionally beautiful.  Meanwhile people eat up Sandor and Sansa like it going out of style.  I’m not saying that as a insult to people who like that pairing.  I’m saying that it is interesting that our reactions to the traditional beauty and the beast trope is acceptable when a male is the beast.  But if a woman is less than a runway model they are seen as someone unworthy of romantic love.

(via khaleesiofwine)

Reblogging for all the commentary in regards to the first quote. She either has to be ugly but strong OR pretty but weak. And neither should either aesthetic cross reference in anyway.

(via mariathegirlwhofangirled)