anonymous said:

Are you saying people from Iran are aryans but they aren't blonde blue eyed or white

Umm some of them yes because Iran is made up of many ethnic groups and the present composition is due to a lot of earlier intermarrying, migrations and invasions. And I’m pretty sure it’s possible for Iranians to have light hair and eyes considering the very diverse mix of genetic haplogroups they have.

And the term “Aryan” predated Hitler. You do realise the definition of “Aryan” you’re using is Hitler’s racist propaganda? Hitler appropriated it from Sanskrit- a language used in classical Indian texts- “arya” = noble. “Iran” means “Land of the Aryans” and that has been the local name of the country for CENTURIES before the Nazi Party was even a miserable concept. Yes, there was “Persia” but that was from the Greek name of Iran. The Aryan = blonde hair, blue eyes is bullshit made up by the Nazis. The term “Aryan” is derived from what the ancestors of Iranians (and Indians and other people in the neighbouring region) called themselves when they migrated to these places. Nothing to do with blonde hair and blue eyes until Hitler decided to seize it.

If you read my post about the blonde Indian girl, you’d know “whiteness” as you consider it is just the US definition of white = European origin- nothing more than a social construct founded on poor biology. Does this make much sense biologically when the first white person was probably Indian or Middle Eastern? Because it seems that’s where the gene for fair skin found in most Europeans originates. Plus Iranians for example, share DNA haplogroups with Greeks, Italians and Turkish people. The former two are almost always racialised as “White” in the US, so you know, if you really want to use the term “white” as an honest descriptor of skin colour, many Iranians look as “White” as Europeans- though of course, other Iranians come in a range of colours. Biologically, fair skin is not some exclusive thing owned by Europeans, no matter how much socio-political terms have conveyed that impression. 

Raven-Symoné just posted this image on her Facebook and wow, it’s made me MAD. This is what I write about it on Facebook:


As an African this image is infuriating to me personally.

1) Africa is a continent, not a country

2) Africa has prosperous, beautiful big cities with wealthy, comfortable, happy people as well as people in dire states of need.

THERE ARE EMPOVERISHED PEOPLE ALL OVER THE WORLD AND THEY ALL NEED OUR HELP. This common image of Africa as ‘Land of the Charity Cases’ makes me furious. You think of Africa and it’s all pitiful starving children, tears, hands extended, begging for your spare change and off cuts. I feel like Western Asia often gets tarred with the same brush. Charity is needed in Africa like it us needed in Asia, Europe, The Americas, Australasia, all over the world. I’m not saying STOP giving to charity I’m just saying that there are millions of people rich and poor in Africa and they demand respect not pity. We aren’t begging for your damned ice water, we are looking for ways to build pumps and wells in our villages. We don’t wan the food your child won’t finish at the table, we want the means to grow and buy our own. Africa is striving for Education, improved infrastructure, to create wealth for all of us that desire it, to create a future that isn’t war torn and tumultuous. We are more than just your ‘I’m such a good person’ trump card, we are millions of lives and languages and backgrounds and faces that are all grouped together, called primitive, with our hands twisted to look outstretched and begging.

white people want to say shit like “all stereotypes have some truth to them” up until the point you say that white people are racist, then suddenly they’re experts on the civil rights movement and “this isn’t what Martin Luther King Jr fought for”

"Django Unchained" actress Danièle Watts says she was accosted by police and handcuffed on Thursday in Los Angeles after being mistaken for a prostitute. Watts, who played house slave "CoCo" in "Dj…


Wow. A black woman kisses her husband who is white and gets arrested by the police because they think that a relationship between a black woman and a white guy is prostitution.

Myers Briggs by Do You Even Understand Myers Briggs

INFJ: Not soft and fluffy, and not perfect
ESTP: Just cause they’re spontaneous doesn’t mean they’re dumb
INTJ: Yes, they do have emotions, ever heard of a human?
ESFP: Fun fact: You can like fun and still be a valuable member of society
INFP: They are NOT gutless these guys can be immovable on stuff they care about
ESTJ: Using methods that already work doesn’t mean never questioning authority
INTP: Yes, they enjoy learning. That does not mean they always get good grades.
ESFJ: There’s a lot more to them than just “oh yea they’re just always religious”
ISFJ: If all you have to say is “they’re boring” then take a step back
ENTP: Yes, they ARE actually capable of keeping their commitments.
ISTJ: They aren’t automatically racist like how did you even come up with that?
ENFP: They might be energetic but they can also be serious like since when are those two mutually exclusive
ISFP: They can be insightful as hell leave them alone
ISTP: They are so underrated like no one ever talks about them why

With help of ENTP consultant deadlyliv
Watch on

Beats by Dre Presents: Powerbeats2 Wireless - Nothing Stops Serena

This is a really cool commercial for Serena; until this one, Richard Sherman had my favorite Beats by Dre commercial. (I track commercials that I like that feature Black girls/Black women.) 

What interests me most about this commercial is Serena’s presentation. Here is an incredibly talented and powerful athlete, just won the 2014 U.S. Open and her skill, her head game, her intellect on the court and her athletic prowess cannot be denied. And because of this skill and the hypervisibility of her body as a dark skinned Black woman, in the context of how misogynoir manifests in both the media and society itself, she is regularly referred to as a “man.” As in, despite her being cisgender, because of anti-Blackness and misogynoir, her womanhood is regularly challenged and denied, in often transmisogynistic ways, similarly to how White “feminist icon” Joan Rivers did to Michelle Obama, who is also cisgender. The “strong Black woman” archetype against Serena and “angry Black woman” archetype against Michelle Obama operates not just as ableist and racist, but specifically misogynoiristic; it’s about denying their womanhood as Black women. This is not a suggestion that cis privilege doesn’t exist for Black women, especially when examining the experiences of cis Black women and Black trans women; it’s complicating the way privilege is discussed with an intersectional perspective versus a linear one shaped by White academic discourse on oppression, which usually co-opts intersectionality in an epistemically violent way to center Whiteness, while simultaneously denying White privilege

Serena is so femme in this commercial and in her appearance in general. Her sculpted eyebrows, her eye shadow, her makeup, her pink tank top, her jewelry, her manicured nails, her hair. All femme presentation. Her body (and her dark skin)—regularly the site which people use deny her womanhood—is one that is powerful and strong but incredibly curvy. And “curvy” is not required to be a woman (nor is femme presentation), but it is interesting how “womanly” it is considered to be when that curvy body is not Black and especially not dark skinned if Black. The athletic appearance of strength in her body becomes a place to deny her womanhood. Strength for women—which in the media is usually typed as the thin cis White woman “kicking ass”—is considered an asset to womanhood and “empowerment" as long as that "empowerment" rests on denying Black women’s womanhood through degradation of our bodies. (Oh and such "empowerment" also rests on denying Black women’s identification as "feminists" since "feminist" and "human" are used interchangeably, as a form of epistemic violence, since White womanhood is automatically considered “feminist” just for existing.)

This does not mean that White women do not experience misogyny and body shaming. What it does mean is that while misogyny is something that all women experience, reclamation for empowerment for women’s bodies usually means reclamation for thin cis White women’s bodies at the cost of Black women’s bodies, fat women’s bodies, disabled women’s bodies, trans women’s bodies (and bodies with many of these identities intersecting) etc. In this case, I look at it through a lens critiquing colourism, anti-Blackness, misogynoir and transmisogyny in regards to Serena and Black women, in general. And because of anti-Blackness and the history of degradation of Black bodies into non-human chattel and still treated as suchBlack women’s bodies require its own conversation.

Serena is 32; I am 35. I have grown up hearing the anti-Black, misogynoiristic, transmisogynistic slander of her body and her appearance. I tire of it. Deeply. Thus, I see this commercial as a celebration of her own interior life (as in, her own thought process, preparation etc. existing independently of the White Gaze’s validation in this commercial), her head game, her skill, her body, her skin, her beauty, her life. I like it a lot. ❤ 


Hey! So in light of the Mike Brown shooting I started a social justice club at my high school to raise dialogue about an issue that is very close to us geographically but extremely separate culturally. Our first campaign we’re working on is called #thinkbeforeyouspeak . The idea is to address microagression in academic settings by confronting viewers with a subject’s face and a direct quote of something a student or faculty member said to them at school. It’s been really successful so far, and we’re working on expanding it outside of CHS. If you’d like to bring the campaign to your high school/college/workplace please message me here on tumblr!! We can edit your photos for you and compile them in our master album :)

cardozzza said:

Hi, FYWH! I'm writing a thing, and the story centers around two queer women. I've been frustrated that all the LGBT+ books I could find centered around tropes like 'everything that happens is because you're gay!' or 'your family will abandon you!'. Are there any other tropes I should be aware of?

There are a few other common ones that you probably know of, but I’ll go ahead and list out:

The Villainous Gay/Murderous Trans Person/Violent Bisexual - This all stems from the same idea - there is something inherently wrong with being queer, and that will manifest in terrible ways. It’s also taking advantage of ‘gay panic’ and the fear of gay people being attracted to straight people by translating that fear into murder and violent actions.

Curing the Lesbian  - This is one thing that only, only happens to women who like women - the idea that lesbians can be ‘cured’  of only liking women by that one special guy’s dick, always through sex, always changing them to like men instead of realizing they are bisexual. It goes hand-in-hand with the narrative that women who are lesbians just have something against men, that their attraction isn’t legitimate.

The Gay Best Friend/Sidekick - The GBF you know - he’s the one who knows all about fashion and is a great listener to his straight girl friends, and that’s the only role he serves. There’s a whole movie about this. The Sidekick is more common in books that are trying to do better, but to me they still have a lot of the same problems - they are a secondary character who is the single person not straight, and that takes up much of their personality and purpose.

While there are more (and people are welcome to add their own), your basic safety net is ensuring that your characters are people first, and their sexuality does not drive all of their actions, motivations, or personality. See Also:

Watch on

Here’s how absurd it would sound if lesbians said the stuff straight people say