because while men can fail you

Across the Divide

TITLE: Across The Divide


AUTHOR: wolfpawn

ORIGINAL IMAGINE: Imagine Loki sneaking out of the palace as a youth to see the city and countryside, while out one day, he accidentally gets in trouble for something, but a young girl deals with the situation, allowing him to be left alone and his true identity be kept secret. She is a poor girl who is only in the city to sell goods with her father, so she does not realise it is Loki, even though she sees his face. They form a friendship as she shows him around the city, and tells him the date she comes to the city every month for a particular market.

RATING: Teen and Up 

Ariella stood at the door of her home, she thought at most, the bag was going to contain a piece of silver or two, at most, and a few bronzes, but it was all silver, she looked at them all, there was at least ten, but to her shame, she could not count any higher. She only knew to ten by fluke from listening to people. How could she ever explain that to her father and mother how he ever came to possess them. She thought of how he had acted in front of Fandral, she was embarrassed, certain the young high-born would never want to see her again because of his behaviour.

“Where are you?” She turned around and closed the door, both of her parents glaring at her. “Get your head out of the clouds girl.”

“Sorry, mother.” She looked to the floor.

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

(1)You've said that men can't sell their stories and that women dominate the field, and while it is certainly true (women dominating the field), you think the reason for this is that women generally write kinky porn for women to enjoy and men do not. Have you taken into consideration the sheer amount of women writing m/m fiction, comparing to man? And that readers of those works are predominantly women? That men are generally not interested in romance genre, which m/m fiction mostly is.

(2)No one is keeping men from writing their stories. They just don’t do it much. In the m/m fiction section at least. Or maybe there is some gatekeeping movement going on, where women harass man out of “their field”. I have never heard about it, but if it’s true than I’ll be happy to be proven wrong. Maybe there are some hidden gems written by not women no one’s heard about because of that. Can you recommend some?

hi, and thank you for these asks. they pose an interesting question: are men stopped from writing erotica?

i want to say yes. but it might not be the way you think. 

i ran across this thread some weeks ago, and it has stayed with me for quite a while. though i do think the entire thread is important to read, i want to focus on what thebibliosphere is writing:

Oh my gods this. This is everything I try and fail to say when people ask me how to explain fetishization vs storytelling.

Do you know how many books by gay men I edited in my time at the erotica publishing house? One.

Out of literal thousands of manuscripts, there was One gay man writing m/m, the rest were all by women, and I feel safe in saying, the majority of them, not from within the LGBTQA+ community.

And boy howdy did they pitch fits when we turned to them and said “your manuscript does not meet our health and safety requirements please revise” because our house had a strict safe sane consensual rule, along with body positivity, which everyone LOVED when they were writing m/f stories. But when it came to m/m we had so many authors say “ew, but that’s not ~sexy~ :/” to which my reply was often a very politely phrased “literally don’t give a fuck Susan, you know what else isn’t sexy? Bleeding assholes, which coincidentally is what you’re being.”

But y'know, nicer. Because I’m a fucking proffesional.

Anyway. Do you want to know what happened to said singular man writing m/m fiction? He got dropped after a year. Because, and I quote, this is a direct line from our then marketing team, about a gay man writing gay erotica: “that’s not what women want to read”

And if that’s not one of the most precise and fucking infuriating demonstrations of what the fuck is wrong with the “but I write gay slash fic! I can’t be homophobic!” “~allies~” (spoiler: you’re not) in fandom and yes, even in “real” publishing, I dunno what is.

There is a Difference between storytelling and fetishization, and all y'all crying “kinkshaming!” when someone asks you to treat them with respect, need to stop.

emphasis mine

i also found this ask that thebibliosphere got, but i’ll only quote what i found the most important:

Which, there’s nothing wrong with women or people who identify as women, writing m/m stories. But when there’s an entire industry dedicated to gay male suffering aimed as cis straight women, there’s a serious problem. People are not objects, they are not dolls for you to play with. Anyway.

this isn’t some fanfiction, or fanart, or even a free manhwa found online. it’s published books, where the authors get payed for every sold book, and men - man in this case - can’t even get a deal. because women don’t want to read gay stories written by gay men. a respectable erotica house lays off their only male m/m writer, becuase the marketing team doesn’t find that women are interested in it. 

if that isn’t keeping men away from m/m erotica (and romance), i honestly don’t know what else it might be. 

through this blog, i’m also constantly bringing up the fact that non-mlm’s voices are shut down in writing spaces where m/m is prevalent. i’m a fanfic writer myself, writing fanfiction with an mlm audience in mind, and i’ve gotten comments about how my sex scenes are unrealistic (”you don’t need to prepare an asshole that much!”), or boring (”why do you keep adding lube mid sex scene? and condoms?? ugh”), or outright wrong (umm, what?). 

i’ve had non-mlm writing partners tell me that i shouldn’t write for mlm, because i should focus on what women want to read instead. i’ve been told, when i voice my concerns over how the community is treating mlm creators, to “leave the m/m community if you hate it so much”. me, a gay man. leave the m/m community (which entail MY orientation, MY sex life, and MY relationships), becuase some women think their fetishization and objectification of gay men is more important than my comfort

this is why we say that mlm creators of m/m are shut down. and we, as both fans and consumers of published m/m media, needs to change this

to change the subject: i’m constantly looking for good gay books written by men, but it’s a long and hard road. most best-selling m/m books written by gay men are self published, just so you know. 

i don’t have a list i can recommend right now, especially on the happier side. they’re so hard to find that i’m, myself, still looking for more than one or two. a classic lgbt book, though it’s about internalized homophobia which manifests in misogony and abuse, is giovanni’s room (1956) by james baldwin (a gay black man), and it’s a good book to show that mlm should be the ones writing about male-related homophobia, rather than women. 

if anyone wants to add good m/m books written by mlm, send us an ask or reply to this; we’re aiming to keep a list of good representation on our blog in the future

The ‘SS is abusive’ argument is the dumbest argument ever. It ignores every other relationship in this manga, isolates Sasuke and Sakura, blames the alleged victim and it also ignores the story and context. The way people talk I could have sworn Sakura was happy with Sasuke being evil and ill treating everyone. It also appears that she’s the only one who cared about him because if SS is abusive then he abused Naruto and Kakashi too. Yet no one has an issue because it’s among men and it has nothing to do with romance. As if abusive friendships are nonexistent. If you think Sasuke was abusive then you should say that all of them were wrong to love him instead of blaming Sakura while Naruto chased after him more than she did. When Kakashi and Sakura thought that his death would be the best solution Naruto was the one who opposed it yet Sakura gets blamed for failing to kill him. Naruto can be bffs with Gaara and idolize Pein and Obito but Sakura can’t love Sasuke, her teammate and part of her team 7 family who was reformed. Ok then.

anonymous asked:

But biologically trans women are male. I wouldn't bring this up casually because it's rude and I wouldn't want to trigger dysphoria. But when we're talking about sex-based oppression, healthcare, reproductive rights, etc. sexual organs and biology is important to take into account. Like I've seen trans men who don't want abortions/contraception to be referred to as "female reproductive health" and would rather use phrases like "uterus-bearer" but... the uterus is a female organ.

You were just violent, grey face.

There is no such thing as sex based oppression. Sex, when it enters the social sphere, is always gender. This is why in science it is called social sex.

That particular phrasing, as well, ignores a couple of key points and is Bess Hungerford’s favorite line, relying on the ignorance of most people to “make sense” in the same way that the religious right uses “traditional marriage” to give their arguments that same feeling.

For one, people are what are oppressed, not organs. Organs are parts of people and in English, parts are not gendered.

Because parts are not gendered, it doesn’t matter what someone using the western concept of biology thinks in situations of oppression, and indeed, in the field of human and civil rights that kind of argument is historically less effective.

Sex is a social construct, and it is a really bad one, since the system you are referencing is basic 8th grade stuff that people working in that area already will tell you is way too simplistic.

So here is the deal: you want to say that, fine. Say it. But understand that each time you do, you are being violent. You are hurting people. You, personally, are acting immorally.

Next you have your uterus argument, and remember something really key here from above: the kind of 8th grace biology you are referring too is flesh on a slab, a slide, in the ideation of a classification that ignores a huge chunk of the population on purpose.

It is a conformist model. And once you bring people into it, interacting around their suppositions of it, it becomes a social quality, thereby becoming social sex, or gender.

Social sex is where oppression exists because oppression is a social function. Physicality under scrutiny, absence social interaction, does not have oppression (though the classification one produces for social uses may, and on this case do).

The basis of the patriarchal arguments around women’s reproductive rights are all centered around the patriarchal notion that women’s bodies are inferior and purposed to create babies.

For that to hold water, only women can have that distinction. If men have that, then the whole methodology fails.

Arguments which use that point are serving the interests of the patriarchy. That includes all of yours above.

Now, if men have a uterus, which some men do have, then how can that uterus be gendered, in English, as woman’s?

So the assertion that it is a female organ works in the interest of conformity and patriarchy. Asserting that it is not so, that men have such, breaks those structures and resists them, while making the fight practically and usefully larger because it means looking at a more universal solution while still letting you speak, in those clinical terms, of the particular, specific issues.

In terms of political and social movements, the arguments you make are dehumanizing, reductive, and abstract. That makes for bad policy, more difficult change, and continued oppression.

It also strips everything of its diversity, whitewashes it, and increases the stigma associated, instead of decreasing such, thereby placing the current oppressive systems as the norm, and reality as aberrant.

So no, trans women are not men, sex based oppression is a patriarchal system, and men have uteri (and, factually, not just trans men).

Now, stop being violent.

One of the things I love about The 100 is the names of the people groups. You have the Sky People, the Grounders, and the Mountain Men. The first two have both male and female leadership. And not in an equal opportunity way but in a who is the best person for the job sort of way. For the Sky People, that’s a pretty even mix. This makes sense too. They’re still running off the idea of the democracies they left behind when nuclear war broke out, so those concepts of equal representation and the idea that the numbers should be even would continue to linger.

The Grounders have a stronger grasp on the idea that their leaders are quite simply, the people who can do it. For them right now, that’s predominantly the women. We see a few male seconds and some male leadership in smaller groupings, but its the women that lead. The Grounders live in a brutal world, so its natural that their leadership takes a Darwinistic approach: you step up, you fall in line, or you die. 

The 100 are a bit of an outlying group, because you can see the upbringing of the Sky People style, while the influence of the Grounders and being on the ground itself is clearly affecting their style. 

And then there’s the Mountain Men. MEN. They aren’t the Mountain Group or the Mountaineers. They’re the Mountain Men. We don’t see female leadership here. Even the one female doctor is clearly less respected by the others, merely a tool to get them out of Mount Weather. It’s an out-dated patriarchal society through and through. And in the end? This is the group that fails. And that to me is fascinating.

anonymous asked:

I guess I don't understand why people are being so much harsher with Agent Carter than, say, the first Cap movie -- that movie had Jim and Gabe, yes, but they barely had any screen time or lines). Agent Cater hasn't been great at POC representation, but in one episode, it still had more representation than the entire first Cap movie. And both the film/TV series take place in the same historical period. But I haven't seen nearly as much resistance to The First Avenger as I have of Agent Cater.

Captain America had more PoC representation than AgentCarter I don’t know why you’re discounting Gabe Jones and Jim Morita. They were good enough for Steve to pick for his Howling Commandos and decently fleshed out characters in their own right, not to mention that Nick Fury was in it too? Like he was hugely important to bringing Steve and his storyline into the present day.  Whereas Agent Carter had one PoC and he was a low level villain only serving as a bad guy.  

Things we know about Gabe Jones from Captain America:

  • He’s gone to college,
  • he’s fluent in French, enough to be friendly with Jacques in his own language and looks like he translated for him on occasion
  • took enough German to know get around in a German tank

Things we know from Jim Morita

  • He’s from Fresno,  
  • Morita is a Japanese surname, because of that we know that if he has any family at all they’re probably in Japanese Internment camps while he’s fighting for a country that has deemed it acceptable to doubt his loyalty and torn away the property he may have had before 1942

I shouldn’t have to remind anyone how Director Fury is the one to ground Steve in the 21st century, after the illusion of being in an apartment in the 40’s fails he meets with Steve.  That’s 3 whole men of color who aren’t just throwaway characters to be easily killed.

Like you can pretend that they don’t mean much to PoC audiences but they actually mean so much to us to see positive characters like them onscreen and respected as part of canon. Don’t erase them so easily. “Agent Cater hasn’t been great at POC representation, but in one episode, it still had more representation than the entire first Cap movie.”  More representation for who? For PoC? No I just disproved that we had representation.

Do you mean Agent Carter has more representation for white women? Because yeah I can agree with you on that, AC has lots of white women. But make sure you recognize that its representation for white women not PoC. Especially when AC had the opportunity to feature both Gabe and Jim in the show and they choose instead only white men from Captain America

mod m

anonymous asked:

I'd like to submit the entire blog goodbyeadulthood as a failed larry prediction. Just the entire thing. Every word.

Haha! Well the blog was only active for a couple of months, so there’s not that much to dig through. Here’s something I found on it though (x):

And before I comment on all the problematic things this post says, I’m going to compare it to the “About Me” page on diggingandfluff’s blog that sounds eerily similar to it (x).

The former describes Harry and the later describes Louis. 

“And as far as Harry goes, there wasn’t one particular thing that caught my attention that I can pinpoint exactly, but it was just the vibe that I got from him. He’s very flirty and charming in person towards basically everyone around him, men and women alike, but he just seemed a lot more comfortable around other men. Also just the way he carries himself is much more feminine than most straight men that I know. And that doesn’t always mean definitely gay, but in a room where the majority of the men were openly and comfortably gay, he didn’t stick out as the lone straight man, is basically what I’m saying.”

“I had absolutely zero idea of who he [Louis] was, but it was clear as day to me he was gay (He was also charming, polite and a bit cheeky).”

Each blogger has met one of them, and both Harry and Louis were both described as acting gay. So while technically not a failed Larry prediction, it is more of an prediction/assumption they shouldn’t be making in the first place because they’re just reinforcing the idea that you can use stereotypes to prove someone is gay or straight instead of letting someone self-identify.