discardingimages:

'De Herinacio. On the Hedgehog' the first nature video based on medieval bestiary ('the Rochester Bestiary', British Library, Royal 12 F XIII).
In Latin with English subs.

Dolls & animation: Ala Nunu Leszyńska/Obrazki nunu
Storyboard: Karolina Chabier
Music: Magda Tejchma
Narrated by Agnieszka Budzińska-Bennett/Ensemble Peregrina
Text after the Latin Physiologus translated by Miłosz Sosnowski

Follow Discarding Images on Facebook and Twitter.

cognitivedissonance:

spiderkiss:

poppypicklesticks:

maraudere:

Josh Thomas talks about male suicide

I wonder how feminists will react to this
Probably ignore it then go back to making male tears mugs and gifs 

Actually this is a very common idea among feminists
It’s something feminists have been talking about for years it’s called toxic masculinity and it’s one of the common threads among the topic of ‘Patriarchy hurts men too’. If fact the first time I read about toxic masculinity was on a feminist blog.
If you actually read things feminists talk about instead of straw manning them you might know this but OH WELL

Man gives idea credence when explained by other man, water is still wet, news at 11.
Zoom Info
cognitivedissonance:

spiderkiss:

poppypicklesticks:

maraudere:

Josh Thomas talks about male suicide

I wonder how feminists will react to this
Probably ignore it then go back to making male tears mugs and gifs 

Actually this is a very common idea among feminists
It’s something feminists have been talking about for years it’s called toxic masculinity and it’s one of the common threads among the topic of ‘Patriarchy hurts men too’. If fact the first time I read about toxic masculinity was on a feminist blog.
If you actually read things feminists talk about instead of straw manning them you might know this but OH WELL

Man gives idea credence when explained by other man, water is still wet, news at 11.
Zoom Info
cognitivedissonance:

spiderkiss:

poppypicklesticks:

maraudere:

Josh Thomas talks about male suicide

I wonder how feminists will react to this
Probably ignore it then go back to making male tears mugs and gifs 

Actually this is a very common idea among feminists
It’s something feminists have been talking about for years it’s called toxic masculinity and it’s one of the common threads among the topic of ‘Patriarchy hurts men too’. If fact the first time I read about toxic masculinity was on a feminist blog.
If you actually read things feminists talk about instead of straw manning them you might know this but OH WELL

Man gives idea credence when explained by other man, water is still wet, news at 11.
Zoom Info
cognitivedissonance:

spiderkiss:

poppypicklesticks:

maraudere:

Josh Thomas talks about male suicide

I wonder how feminists will react to this
Probably ignore it then go back to making male tears mugs and gifs 

Actually this is a very common idea among feminists
It’s something feminists have been talking about for years it’s called toxic masculinity and it’s one of the common threads among the topic of ‘Patriarchy hurts men too’. If fact the first time I read about toxic masculinity was on a feminist blog.
If you actually read things feminists talk about instead of straw manning them you might know this but OH WELL

Man gives idea credence when explained by other man, water is still wet, news at 11.
Zoom Info
cognitivedissonance:

spiderkiss:

poppypicklesticks:

maraudere:

Josh Thomas talks about male suicide

I wonder how feminists will react to this
Probably ignore it then go back to making male tears mugs and gifs 

Actually this is a very common idea among feminists
It’s something feminists have been talking about for years it’s called toxic masculinity and it’s one of the common threads among the topic of ‘Patriarchy hurts men too’. If fact the first time I read about toxic masculinity was on a feminist blog.
If you actually read things feminists talk about instead of straw manning them you might know this but OH WELL

Man gives idea credence when explained by other man, water is still wet, news at 11.
Zoom Info
cognitivedissonance:

spiderkiss:

poppypicklesticks:

maraudere:

Josh Thomas talks about male suicide

I wonder how feminists will react to this
Probably ignore it then go back to making male tears mugs and gifs 

Actually this is a very common idea among feminists
It’s something feminists have been talking about for years it’s called toxic masculinity and it’s one of the common threads among the topic of ‘Patriarchy hurts men too’. If fact the first time I read about toxic masculinity was on a feminist blog.
If you actually read things feminists talk about instead of straw manning them you might know this but OH WELL

Man gives idea credence when explained by other man, water is still wet, news at 11.
Zoom Info
cognitivedissonance:

spiderkiss:

poppypicklesticks:

maraudere:

Josh Thomas talks about male suicide

I wonder how feminists will react to this
Probably ignore it then go back to making male tears mugs and gifs 

Actually this is a very common idea among feminists
It’s something feminists have been talking about for years it’s called toxic masculinity and it’s one of the common threads among the topic of ‘Patriarchy hurts men too’. If fact the first time I read about toxic masculinity was on a feminist blog.
If you actually read things feminists talk about instead of straw manning them you might know this but OH WELL

Man gives idea credence when explained by other man, water is still wet, news at 11.
Zoom Info
cognitivedissonance:

spiderkiss:

poppypicklesticks:

maraudere:

Josh Thomas talks about male suicide

I wonder how feminists will react to this
Probably ignore it then go back to making male tears mugs and gifs 

Actually this is a very common idea among feminists
It’s something feminists have been talking about for years it’s called toxic masculinity and it’s one of the common threads among the topic of ‘Patriarchy hurts men too’. If fact the first time I read about toxic masculinity was on a feminist blog.
If you actually read things feminists talk about instead of straw manning them you might know this but OH WELL

Man gives idea credence when explained by other man, water is still wet, news at 11.
Zoom Info

cognitivedissonance:

spiderkiss:

poppypicklesticks:

maraudere:

Josh Thomas talks about male suicide

I wonder how feminists will react to this

Probably ignore it then go back to making male tears mugs and gifs 

Actually this is a very common idea among feminists

It’s something feminists have been talking about for years it’s called toxic masculinity and it’s one of the common threads among the topic of ‘Patriarchy hurts men too’. If fact the first time I read about toxic masculinity was on a feminist blog.

If you actually read things feminists talk about instead of straw manning them you might know this but OH WELL

Man gives idea credence when explained by other man, water is still wet, news at 11.

(via wingedyera)

Quill: a new website for medieval manuscript lovers!

sexycodicology:

A new website for medieval manuscripts lovers!

image
Initial P from Leiden VLQ 38, f. 23r

Initial P from Leiden VLQ 38, f. 23r

A super-cool website about medieval manuscripts has gone online today!

“This is to alert you to a new product of the “Turning Over a New Leaf” project: a website (in English) devoted to the medieval manuscript, aimed at a non-expert audience: http://quill.leiden.edu/. Some sixty web pages take you through the different production stages of the manuscript, and…

View On WordPress

seananmcguire:

philsandifer:

collaterlysisters:

howtobeafuckinglady:

skinandbands:

howtobeafuckinglady:

tin-d0g:

xeansan:

camerongale:

drakensberg:

ttthegingerqueer:

Just filled out my health insurance forms!

yeah!!! fucking around with health insurance forms!!!!

I hate when people complain about “oh health forms are stupid they want my biological sex instead of my gender!!!!” or “they only have male or female!!!”
There’s a reason for that, you dumb fucks, and they’re referring to biological sex
Different health risks are present in different sexes, and whatever gender is in your head does not change the fact that if you were born female, you have a higher risk for certain cancers and osteoporosis, and if you were born male you have a higher risk for heart disease and often a shorter lifespan than a female.
In other words, your biological sex is an important factor in health and health insurance, and your special snowflake status doesn’t change that.

Coulda said it nicer but it’s true; it’s about health.

No. There gets a point where nice doesn’t work. There’s too many stupid ass angsty teens on here that are gonna get themselves seriously hurt or sick because they wanna be a special fucking snowflake. Lemme tell you a thing. Doctors don’t give a flying fuck what you identify as. All they want to know is do you have two X chromosomes or an XY? Because cancer and lupus and certain medicines don’t give a flying fuck what pronouns you use. This is about your fucking LIFE. stop being angsty for TWELVE SECONDS because when you’re in an ambulance or going into cardiac arrest or whatever the situation may be, it’s ESSENTIAL that you get your head out of your ass long enough to tell them your BIOLOGICAL SEX that you were BORN WITH. It literally may save your life.

this is all very violent imo 

It’s important

it’s not but ok lol

hi im one of those doctors you idiots keep using as an excuse to yell at trans people
every single thing you’ve said is incorrect, and you do not know what you are talking about
I may need to know what organs a patient does or does not have, their hormonal status and history of exposure, and even their karyotype. Ideas like “biological sex” can often imply a lot of this. In medicine, that isn’t good enough. We have to be able to catch exceptions, side-effects, sequelae, and anomalies that might affect only one in a million patients. Exceptions to any one or more elements of the “biological sex” paradigm are much, much, much, much more common than that.
You genuinely do not know a patient’s chromosomes until you’ve run an expensive test, and even then, who knows! they could be a mosaic. Whether this information is important, and when, and why, depends. It all completely depends. A gender/sex/whatever marker on a form is not and never will be important. No matter how you cut it, is and always will be a miniscule source of information. Frankly, by disclosing a trans background on this form, the OP has made it more diagnostically useful to a clinician than that form has ever been before - we trans people are statistically very uncommon and tend to encounter distinct hardships and challenges that are highly relevant to our medical needs. Even then, it would still be no substitute for actually interviewing the patient.
So that’s the other thing you House addicts don’t have a clue about. Good doctors do “give a flying fuck” about how the patient identifies, because a patient’s background is absolutely key to their health. Knowing a patient’s basic demographics can help me think about what may be more or less likely in terms of their care needs.
More importantly, it helps me treat my patient with respect. This is both the decent thing to do and an absolute minimum requirement for being able to get damn near anything done. You sneering choads couldn’t cure a side of beef.

thewomanreplies - I found a doctor who doesn’t need excessive kicking in the head!

A+ doctor response.

seananmcguire:

philsandifer:

collaterlysisters:

howtobeafuckinglady:

skinandbands:

howtobeafuckinglady:

tin-d0g:

xeansan:

camerongale:

drakensberg:

ttthegingerqueer:

Just filled out my health insurance forms!

yeah!!! fucking around with health insurance forms!!!!

I hate when people complain about “oh health forms are stupid they want my biological sex instead of my gender!!!!” or “they only have male or female!!!”

There’s a reason for that, you dumb fucks, and they’re referring to biological sex

Different health risks are present in different sexes, and whatever gender is in your head does not change the fact that if you were born female, you have a higher risk for certain cancers and osteoporosis, and if you were born male you have a higher risk for heart disease and often a shorter lifespan than a female.

In other words, your biological sex is an important factor in health and health insurance, and your special snowflake status doesn’t change that.

Coulda said it nicer but it’s true; it’s about health.

No. There gets a point where nice doesn’t work. There’s too many stupid ass angsty teens on here that are gonna get themselves seriously hurt or sick because they wanna be a special fucking snowflake. Lemme tell you a thing. Doctors don’t give a flying fuck what you identify as. All they want to know is do you have two X chromosomes or an XY? Because cancer and lupus and certain medicines don’t give a flying fuck what pronouns you use. This is about your fucking LIFE. stop being angsty for TWELVE SECONDS because when you’re in an ambulance or going into cardiac arrest or whatever the situation may be, it’s ESSENTIAL that you get your head out of your ass long enough to tell them your BIOLOGICAL SEX that you were BORN WITH. It literally may save your life.

this is all very violent imo 

It’s important

it’s not but ok lol

hi im one of those doctors you idiots keep using as an excuse to yell at trans people

every single thing you’ve said is incorrect, and you do not know what you are talking about

I may need to know what organs a patient does or does not have, their hormonal status and history of exposure, and even their karyotype. Ideas like “biological sex” can often imply a lot of this. In medicine, that isn’t good enough. We have to be able to catch exceptions, side-effects, sequelae, and anomalies that might affect only one in a million patients. Exceptions to any one or more elements of the “biological sex” paradigm are much, much, much, much more common than that.

You genuinely do not know a patient’s chromosomes until you’ve run an expensive test, and even then, who knows! they could be a mosaic. Whether this information is important, and when, and why, depends. It all completely depends. A gender/sex/whatever marker on a form is not and never will be important. No matter how you cut it, is and always will be a miniscule source of information. Frankly, by disclosing a trans background on this form, the OP has made it more diagnostically useful to a clinician than that form has ever been before - we trans people are statistically very uncommon and tend to encounter distinct hardships and challenges that are highly relevant to our medical needs. Even then, it would still be no substitute for actually interviewing the patient.

So that’s the other thing you House addicts don’t have a clue about. Good doctors do “give a flying fuck” about how the patient identifies, because a patient’s background is absolutely key to their health. Knowing a patient’s basic demographics can help me think about what may be more or less likely in terms of their care needs.

More importantly, it helps me treat my patient with respect. This is both the decent thing to do and an absolute minimum requirement for being able to get damn near anything done. You sneering choads couldn’t cure a side of beef.

thewomanreplies - I found a doctor who doesn’t need excessive kicking in the head!

A+ doctor response.

Before I went to sleep last night, i had an eyelash stuck in my eye. It was a little irritating, but I couldn’t find it so I just went to sleep.

And I promptly had a dream where I unhinged the upper part of my face, exposing the shiny red all around the eyes. The offending eyelash was pretty easy to find and remove that way, and I slotted my face back into place. I remember feeling puzzled for a moment at the seam between my upper face and lower face, wondering if that had been there all along. But the irritating thing was gone from my eye, so I shrugged and went to sleep.

Then I woke up and what the hell I unhinged my face? What the fuck, dream-me. That’s not normal.

rainfelt:

stfueverything:

libertarianloki:

Thus, the logic of the feminist argument to “Teach men not to rape” is revealed.

Yes because it’s such a radical notion to expect rapists to control themselves.

Uh, we do tell thieves not to rob, though. We actually spend a lot of energy teaching kids that stealing is wrong. We keep trying to teach them it’s wrong through their teens and adult years.
And when someone gets robbed? Cops don’t ask them if their front door was locked. They don’t ask them if they invited the thief into their house and maybe said the thief was free to take things before changing their mind the next day. And this is true even though sometimes people do get robbed by folks they invite in under false pretenses.
Cops and lawyers and judges don’t work together to make people who get robbed feel like shit for not installing extra security systems or putting bars on their windows. They don’t use people’s former history of inviting neighbors in and letting them borrow stuff to argue that they had no right to expect someone to respect their property. The media doesn’t talk about how the thief’s promising life was ruined by their victim’s decision to prosecute.
Your metaphor is bad and you should feel bad.

rainfelt:

stfueverything:

libertarianloki:

Thus, the logic of the feminist argument to “Teach men not to rape” is revealed.

Yes because it’s such a radical notion to expect rapists to control themselves.

Uh, we do tell thieves not to rob, though. We actually spend a lot of energy teaching kids that stealing is wrong. We keep trying to teach them it’s wrong through their teens and adult years.

And when someone gets robbed? Cops don’t ask them if their front door was locked. They don’t ask them if they invited the thief into their house and maybe said the thief was free to take things before changing their mind the next day. And this is true even though sometimes people do get robbed by folks they invite in under false pretenses.

Cops and lawyers and judges don’t work together to make people who get robbed feel like shit for not installing extra security systems or putting bars on their windows. They don’t use people’s former history of inviting neighbors in and letting them borrow stuff to argue that they had no right to expect someone to respect their property. The media doesn’t talk about how the thief’s promising life was ruined by their victim’s decision to prosecute.

Your metaphor is bad and you should feel bad.

(via seananmcguire)

seananmcguire:

candycornpizza:

a-little-bi-furious:

absentlyabbie:

tosailuponthesea:

tomasthebreaker:

How about no? Queer characters are humans. Humans die. That’s like me saying “Don’t kill black or Hispanic characters because I’m black and Hispanic or because they’re black and hispanic”. Characters die. It sucks.

Yes, it does suck. Because representation of minority groups matters. When queer characters are consistently used to prop up straight leads and killed off to give their straight counter-parts angsty storylines, it is a problem.
And yes, it is actually very much like saying “don’t kill black or Latin@ characters.” Because those groups also suffer from issues of representation.
It’s not that queer characters should never ever die. It’s that we haven’t yet reached a point where that one queer character’s death (and it’s not just one) is incidental because there are so many other queer characters on the screen.
Shows like Orange is the New Black, Sleepy Hollow, How to Get Away with Murder, and Brooklyn Nine-Nine all have multiple POC in lead roles. But there is much further to go.
Stephanie Beatriz (who plays Rosa Diaz on Brooklyn Nine-Nine) wrote about how she was shocked to even get the role because a Latina actress (Melissa Fumero who plays Amy Santiago) had already been cast. How messed up is that?
LGBTQ+ representation is arguably even worse. In fact, the only show I can think of that is currently on air that has more than one main queer character is Orange is the New Black. (Correct me if I’m wrong. Please.) And bisexual characters are even rarer than gay & lesbian characters. Not to mention the bisexual erasure that happens, when a character who has previously had feelings-for-or-relationships-with people of one gender, begins to have feelings-for-or-a-relationship-with someone of another gender, and is declared to have “become” gay without even acknowledging the possibility that their sexuality is more fluid than that. (Willow “gay now” Rosenberg from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Ramona “it was just a phase” Flowers from Scott Pilgrim both spring to mind.)
GLAAD in their Hollywood survey pointed out “that studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises" in particular. Hmm.
On Agents of SHIELD, we had two in-charge, incredible, fierce lesbian agents who were both killed off for shock value & possibly Hunter’s angst, who weren’t even given the screen time to establish their sexualities or relationship.
On Arrow, we had a kick-ass, powerful, inspiring, bisexual hero who was literally thrown away in the garbage to further Oliver’s angst and to fuel Laurel’s evolution into Black Canary.
I say again, STOP KILLING QUEER CHARACTERS.

ALLLLLLL OF THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Also let’s not forget that Black Canary explicitly was not labeled bisexual because the writers and producers "really wanted to approach it like not be salacious, and be sensitive, and be realistic."

“‘studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises’ in particular.”
what the ever loving FUCK

If killing one queer character/character of color/character who is a positive representation of their religion/etc. means literally reducing the number of available characters by 10% or more (usually more), THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN OPTION FOR THE CHOPPING BLOCK.
Zoom Info
seananmcguire:

candycornpizza:

a-little-bi-furious:

absentlyabbie:

tosailuponthesea:

tomasthebreaker:

How about no? Queer characters are humans. Humans die. That’s like me saying “Don’t kill black or Hispanic characters because I’m black and Hispanic or because they’re black and hispanic”. Characters die. It sucks.

Yes, it does suck. Because representation of minority groups matters. When queer characters are consistently used to prop up straight leads and killed off to give their straight counter-parts angsty storylines, it is a problem.
And yes, it is actually very much like saying “don’t kill black or Latin@ characters.” Because those groups also suffer from issues of representation.
It’s not that queer characters should never ever die. It’s that we haven’t yet reached a point where that one queer character’s death (and it’s not just one) is incidental because there are so many other queer characters on the screen.
Shows like Orange is the New Black, Sleepy Hollow, How to Get Away with Murder, and Brooklyn Nine-Nine all have multiple POC in lead roles. But there is much further to go.
Stephanie Beatriz (who plays Rosa Diaz on Brooklyn Nine-Nine) wrote about how she was shocked to even get the role because a Latina actress (Melissa Fumero who plays Amy Santiago) had already been cast. How messed up is that?
LGBTQ+ representation is arguably even worse. In fact, the only show I can think of that is currently on air that has more than one main queer character is Orange is the New Black. (Correct me if I’m wrong. Please.) And bisexual characters are even rarer than gay & lesbian characters. Not to mention the bisexual erasure that happens, when a character who has previously had feelings-for-or-relationships-with people of one gender, begins to have feelings-for-or-a-relationship-with someone of another gender, and is declared to have “become” gay without even acknowledging the possibility that their sexuality is more fluid than that. (Willow “gay now” Rosenberg from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Ramona “it was just a phase” Flowers from Scott Pilgrim both spring to mind.)
GLAAD in their Hollywood survey pointed out “that studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises" in particular. Hmm.
On Agents of SHIELD, we had two in-charge, incredible, fierce lesbian agents who were both killed off for shock value & possibly Hunter’s angst, who weren’t even given the screen time to establish their sexualities or relationship.
On Arrow, we had a kick-ass, powerful, inspiring, bisexual hero who was literally thrown away in the garbage to further Oliver’s angst and to fuel Laurel’s evolution into Black Canary.
I say again, STOP KILLING QUEER CHARACTERS.

ALLLLLLL OF THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Also let’s not forget that Black Canary explicitly was not labeled bisexual because the writers and producers "really wanted to approach it like not be salacious, and be sensitive, and be realistic."

“‘studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises’ in particular.”
what the ever loving FUCK

If killing one queer character/character of color/character who is a positive representation of their religion/etc. means literally reducing the number of available characters by 10% or more (usually more), THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN OPTION FOR THE CHOPPING BLOCK.
Zoom Info
seananmcguire:

candycornpizza:

a-little-bi-furious:

absentlyabbie:

tosailuponthesea:

tomasthebreaker:

How about no? Queer characters are humans. Humans die. That’s like me saying “Don’t kill black or Hispanic characters because I’m black and Hispanic or because they’re black and hispanic”. Characters die. It sucks.

Yes, it does suck. Because representation of minority groups matters. When queer characters are consistently used to prop up straight leads and killed off to give their straight counter-parts angsty storylines, it is a problem.
And yes, it is actually very much like saying “don’t kill black or Latin@ characters.” Because those groups also suffer from issues of representation.
It’s not that queer characters should never ever die. It’s that we haven’t yet reached a point where that one queer character’s death (and it’s not just one) is incidental because there are so many other queer characters on the screen.
Shows like Orange is the New Black, Sleepy Hollow, How to Get Away with Murder, and Brooklyn Nine-Nine all have multiple POC in lead roles. But there is much further to go.
Stephanie Beatriz (who plays Rosa Diaz on Brooklyn Nine-Nine) wrote about how she was shocked to even get the role because a Latina actress (Melissa Fumero who plays Amy Santiago) had already been cast. How messed up is that?
LGBTQ+ representation is arguably even worse. In fact, the only show I can think of that is currently on air that has more than one main queer character is Orange is the New Black. (Correct me if I’m wrong. Please.) And bisexual characters are even rarer than gay & lesbian characters. Not to mention the bisexual erasure that happens, when a character who has previously had feelings-for-or-relationships-with people of one gender, begins to have feelings-for-or-a-relationship-with someone of another gender, and is declared to have “become” gay without even acknowledging the possibility that their sexuality is more fluid than that. (Willow “gay now” Rosenberg from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Ramona “it was just a phase” Flowers from Scott Pilgrim both spring to mind.)
GLAAD in their Hollywood survey pointed out “that studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises" in particular. Hmm.
On Agents of SHIELD, we had two in-charge, incredible, fierce lesbian agents who were both killed off for shock value & possibly Hunter’s angst, who weren’t even given the screen time to establish their sexualities or relationship.
On Arrow, we had a kick-ass, powerful, inspiring, bisexual hero who was literally thrown away in the garbage to further Oliver’s angst and to fuel Laurel’s evolution into Black Canary.
I say again, STOP KILLING QUEER CHARACTERS.

ALLLLLLL OF THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Also let’s not forget that Black Canary explicitly was not labeled bisexual because the writers and producers "really wanted to approach it like not be salacious, and be sensitive, and be realistic."

“‘studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises’ in particular.”
what the ever loving FUCK

If killing one queer character/character of color/character who is a positive representation of their religion/etc. means literally reducing the number of available characters by 10% or more (usually more), THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN OPTION FOR THE CHOPPING BLOCK.
Zoom Info
seananmcguire:

candycornpizza:

a-little-bi-furious:

absentlyabbie:

tosailuponthesea:

tomasthebreaker:

How about no? Queer characters are humans. Humans die. That’s like me saying “Don’t kill black or Hispanic characters because I’m black and Hispanic or because they’re black and hispanic”. Characters die. It sucks.

Yes, it does suck. Because representation of minority groups matters. When queer characters are consistently used to prop up straight leads and killed off to give their straight counter-parts angsty storylines, it is a problem.
And yes, it is actually very much like saying “don’t kill black or Latin@ characters.” Because those groups also suffer from issues of representation.
It’s not that queer characters should never ever die. It’s that we haven’t yet reached a point where that one queer character’s death (and it’s not just one) is incidental because there are so many other queer characters on the screen.
Shows like Orange is the New Black, Sleepy Hollow, How to Get Away with Murder, and Brooklyn Nine-Nine all have multiple POC in lead roles. But there is much further to go.
Stephanie Beatriz (who plays Rosa Diaz on Brooklyn Nine-Nine) wrote about how she was shocked to even get the role because a Latina actress (Melissa Fumero who plays Amy Santiago) had already been cast. How messed up is that?
LGBTQ+ representation is arguably even worse. In fact, the only show I can think of that is currently on air that has more than one main queer character is Orange is the New Black. (Correct me if I’m wrong. Please.) And bisexual characters are even rarer than gay & lesbian characters. Not to mention the bisexual erasure that happens, when a character who has previously had feelings-for-or-relationships-with people of one gender, begins to have feelings-for-or-a-relationship-with someone of another gender, and is declared to have “become” gay without even acknowledging the possibility that their sexuality is more fluid than that. (Willow “gay now” Rosenberg from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Ramona “it was just a phase” Flowers from Scott Pilgrim both spring to mind.)
GLAAD in their Hollywood survey pointed out “that studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises" in particular. Hmm.
On Agents of SHIELD, we had two in-charge, incredible, fierce lesbian agents who were both killed off for shock value & possibly Hunter’s angst, who weren’t even given the screen time to establish their sexualities or relationship.
On Arrow, we had a kick-ass, powerful, inspiring, bisexual hero who was literally thrown away in the garbage to further Oliver’s angst and to fuel Laurel’s evolution into Black Canary.
I say again, STOP KILLING QUEER CHARACTERS.

ALLLLLLL OF THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Also let’s not forget that Black Canary explicitly was not labeled bisexual because the writers and producers "really wanted to approach it like not be salacious, and be sensitive, and be realistic."

“‘studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises’ in particular.”
what the ever loving FUCK

If killing one queer character/character of color/character who is a positive representation of their religion/etc. means literally reducing the number of available characters by 10% or more (usually more), THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN OPTION FOR THE CHOPPING BLOCK.
Zoom Info
seananmcguire:

candycornpizza:

a-little-bi-furious:

absentlyabbie:

tosailuponthesea:

tomasthebreaker:

How about no? Queer characters are humans. Humans die. That’s like me saying “Don’t kill black or Hispanic characters because I’m black and Hispanic or because they’re black and hispanic”. Characters die. It sucks.

Yes, it does suck. Because representation of minority groups matters. When queer characters are consistently used to prop up straight leads and killed off to give their straight counter-parts angsty storylines, it is a problem.
And yes, it is actually very much like saying “don’t kill black or Latin@ characters.” Because those groups also suffer from issues of representation.
It’s not that queer characters should never ever die. It’s that we haven’t yet reached a point where that one queer character’s death (and it’s not just one) is incidental because there are so many other queer characters on the screen.
Shows like Orange is the New Black, Sleepy Hollow, How to Get Away with Murder, and Brooklyn Nine-Nine all have multiple POC in lead roles. But there is much further to go.
Stephanie Beatriz (who plays Rosa Diaz on Brooklyn Nine-Nine) wrote about how she was shocked to even get the role because a Latina actress (Melissa Fumero who plays Amy Santiago) had already been cast. How messed up is that?
LGBTQ+ representation is arguably even worse. In fact, the only show I can think of that is currently on air that has more than one main queer character is Orange is the New Black. (Correct me if I’m wrong. Please.) And bisexual characters are even rarer than gay & lesbian characters. Not to mention the bisexual erasure that happens, when a character who has previously had feelings-for-or-relationships-with people of one gender, begins to have feelings-for-or-a-relationship-with someone of another gender, and is declared to have “become” gay without even acknowledging the possibility that their sexuality is more fluid than that. (Willow “gay now” Rosenberg from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Ramona “it was just a phase” Flowers from Scott Pilgrim both spring to mind.)
GLAAD in their Hollywood survey pointed out “that studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises" in particular. Hmm.
On Agents of SHIELD, we had two in-charge, incredible, fierce lesbian agents who were both killed off for shock value & possibly Hunter’s angst, who weren’t even given the screen time to establish their sexualities or relationship.
On Arrow, we had a kick-ass, powerful, inspiring, bisexual hero who was literally thrown away in the garbage to further Oliver’s angst and to fuel Laurel’s evolution into Black Canary.
I say again, STOP KILLING QUEER CHARACTERS.

ALLLLLLL OF THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Also let’s not forget that Black Canary explicitly was not labeled bisexual because the writers and producers "really wanted to approach it like not be salacious, and be sensitive, and be realistic."

“‘studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises’ in particular.”
what the ever loving FUCK

If killing one queer character/character of color/character who is a positive representation of their religion/etc. means literally reducing the number of available characters by 10% or more (usually more), THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN OPTION FOR THE CHOPPING BLOCK.
Zoom Info
seananmcguire:

candycornpizza:

a-little-bi-furious:

absentlyabbie:

tosailuponthesea:

tomasthebreaker:

How about no? Queer characters are humans. Humans die. That’s like me saying “Don’t kill black or Hispanic characters because I’m black and Hispanic or because they’re black and hispanic”. Characters die. It sucks.

Yes, it does suck. Because representation of minority groups matters. When queer characters are consistently used to prop up straight leads and killed off to give their straight counter-parts angsty storylines, it is a problem.
And yes, it is actually very much like saying “don’t kill black or Latin@ characters.” Because those groups also suffer from issues of representation.
It’s not that queer characters should never ever die. It’s that we haven’t yet reached a point where that one queer character’s death (and it’s not just one) is incidental because there are so many other queer characters on the screen.
Shows like Orange is the New Black, Sleepy Hollow, How to Get Away with Murder, and Brooklyn Nine-Nine all have multiple POC in lead roles. But there is much further to go.
Stephanie Beatriz (who plays Rosa Diaz on Brooklyn Nine-Nine) wrote about how she was shocked to even get the role because a Latina actress (Melissa Fumero who plays Amy Santiago) had already been cast. How messed up is that?
LGBTQ+ representation is arguably even worse. In fact, the only show I can think of that is currently on air that has more than one main queer character is Orange is the New Black. (Correct me if I’m wrong. Please.) And bisexual characters are even rarer than gay & lesbian characters. Not to mention the bisexual erasure that happens, when a character who has previously had feelings-for-or-relationships-with people of one gender, begins to have feelings-for-or-a-relationship-with someone of another gender, and is declared to have “become” gay without even acknowledging the possibility that their sexuality is more fluid than that. (Willow “gay now” Rosenberg from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Ramona “it was just a phase” Flowers from Scott Pilgrim both spring to mind.)
GLAAD in their Hollywood survey pointed out “that studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises" in particular. Hmm.
On Agents of SHIELD, we had two in-charge, incredible, fierce lesbian agents who were both killed off for shock value & possibly Hunter’s angst, who weren’t even given the screen time to establish their sexualities or relationship.
On Arrow, we had a kick-ass, powerful, inspiring, bisexual hero who was literally thrown away in the garbage to further Oliver’s angst and to fuel Laurel’s evolution into Black Canary.
I say again, STOP KILLING QUEER CHARACTERS.

ALLLLLLL OF THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Also let’s not forget that Black Canary explicitly was not labeled bisexual because the writers and producers "really wanted to approach it like not be salacious, and be sensitive, and be realistic."

“‘studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises’ in particular.”
what the ever loving FUCK

If killing one queer character/character of color/character who is a positive representation of their religion/etc. means literally reducing the number of available characters by 10% or more (usually more), THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN OPTION FOR THE CHOPPING BLOCK.
Zoom Info
seananmcguire:

candycornpizza:

a-little-bi-furious:

absentlyabbie:

tosailuponthesea:

tomasthebreaker:

How about no? Queer characters are humans. Humans die. That’s like me saying “Don’t kill black or Hispanic characters because I’m black and Hispanic or because they’re black and hispanic”. Characters die. It sucks.

Yes, it does suck. Because representation of minority groups matters. When queer characters are consistently used to prop up straight leads and killed off to give their straight counter-parts angsty storylines, it is a problem.
And yes, it is actually very much like saying “don’t kill black or Latin@ characters.” Because those groups also suffer from issues of representation.
It’s not that queer characters should never ever die. It’s that we haven’t yet reached a point where that one queer character’s death (and it’s not just one) is incidental because there are so many other queer characters on the screen.
Shows like Orange is the New Black, Sleepy Hollow, How to Get Away with Murder, and Brooklyn Nine-Nine all have multiple POC in lead roles. But there is much further to go.
Stephanie Beatriz (who plays Rosa Diaz on Brooklyn Nine-Nine) wrote about how she was shocked to even get the role because a Latina actress (Melissa Fumero who plays Amy Santiago) had already been cast. How messed up is that?
LGBTQ+ representation is arguably even worse. In fact, the only show I can think of that is currently on air that has more than one main queer character is Orange is the New Black. (Correct me if I’m wrong. Please.) And bisexual characters are even rarer than gay & lesbian characters. Not to mention the bisexual erasure that happens, when a character who has previously had feelings-for-or-relationships-with people of one gender, begins to have feelings-for-or-a-relationship-with someone of another gender, and is declared to have “become” gay without even acknowledging the possibility that their sexuality is more fluid than that. (Willow “gay now” Rosenberg from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Ramona “it was just a phase” Flowers from Scott Pilgrim both spring to mind.)
GLAAD in their Hollywood survey pointed out “that studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises" in particular. Hmm.
On Agents of SHIELD, we had two in-charge, incredible, fierce lesbian agents who were both killed off for shock value & possibly Hunter’s angst, who weren’t even given the screen time to establish their sexualities or relationship.
On Arrow, we had a kick-ass, powerful, inspiring, bisexual hero who was literally thrown away in the garbage to further Oliver’s angst and to fuel Laurel’s evolution into Black Canary.
I say again, STOP KILLING QUEER CHARACTERS.

ALLLLLLL OF THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Also let’s not forget that Black Canary explicitly was not labeled bisexual because the writers and producers "really wanted to approach it like not be salacious, and be sensitive, and be realistic."

“‘studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises’ in particular.”
what the ever loving FUCK

If killing one queer character/character of color/character who is a positive representation of their religion/etc. means literally reducing the number of available characters by 10% or more (usually more), THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN OPTION FOR THE CHOPPING BLOCK.
Zoom Info
seananmcguire:

candycornpizza:

a-little-bi-furious:

absentlyabbie:

tosailuponthesea:

tomasthebreaker:

How about no? Queer characters are humans. Humans die. That’s like me saying “Don’t kill black or Hispanic characters because I’m black and Hispanic or because they’re black and hispanic”. Characters die. It sucks.

Yes, it does suck. Because representation of minority groups matters. When queer characters are consistently used to prop up straight leads and killed off to give their straight counter-parts angsty storylines, it is a problem.
And yes, it is actually very much like saying “don’t kill black or Latin@ characters.” Because those groups also suffer from issues of representation.
It’s not that queer characters should never ever die. It’s that we haven’t yet reached a point where that one queer character’s death (and it’s not just one) is incidental because there are so many other queer characters on the screen.
Shows like Orange is the New Black, Sleepy Hollow, How to Get Away with Murder, and Brooklyn Nine-Nine all have multiple POC in lead roles. But there is much further to go.
Stephanie Beatriz (who plays Rosa Diaz on Brooklyn Nine-Nine) wrote about how she was shocked to even get the role because a Latina actress (Melissa Fumero who plays Amy Santiago) had already been cast. How messed up is that?
LGBTQ+ representation is arguably even worse. In fact, the only show I can think of that is currently on air that has more than one main queer character is Orange is the New Black. (Correct me if I’m wrong. Please.) And bisexual characters are even rarer than gay & lesbian characters. Not to mention the bisexual erasure that happens, when a character who has previously had feelings-for-or-relationships-with people of one gender, begins to have feelings-for-or-a-relationship-with someone of another gender, and is declared to have “become” gay without even acknowledging the possibility that their sexuality is more fluid than that. (Willow “gay now” Rosenberg from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Ramona “it was just a phase” Flowers from Scott Pilgrim both spring to mind.)
GLAAD in their Hollywood survey pointed out “that studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises" in particular. Hmm.
On Agents of SHIELD, we had two in-charge, incredible, fierce lesbian agents who were both killed off for shock value & possibly Hunter’s angst, who weren’t even given the screen time to establish their sexualities or relationship.
On Arrow, we had a kick-ass, powerful, inspiring, bisexual hero who was literally thrown away in the garbage to further Oliver’s angst and to fuel Laurel’s evolution into Black Canary.
I say again, STOP KILLING QUEER CHARACTERS.

ALLLLLLL OF THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Also let’s not forget that Black Canary explicitly was not labeled bisexual because the writers and producers "really wanted to approach it like not be salacious, and be sensitive, and be realistic."

“‘studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises’ in particular.”
what the ever loving FUCK

If killing one queer character/character of color/character who is a positive representation of their religion/etc. means literally reducing the number of available characters by 10% or more (usually more), THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN OPTION FOR THE CHOPPING BLOCK.
Zoom Info
seananmcguire:

candycornpizza:

a-little-bi-furious:

absentlyabbie:

tosailuponthesea:

tomasthebreaker:

How about no? Queer characters are humans. Humans die. That’s like me saying “Don’t kill black or Hispanic characters because I’m black and Hispanic or because they’re black and hispanic”. Characters die. It sucks.

Yes, it does suck. Because representation of minority groups matters. When queer characters are consistently used to prop up straight leads and killed off to give their straight counter-parts angsty storylines, it is a problem.
And yes, it is actually very much like saying “don’t kill black or Latin@ characters.” Because those groups also suffer from issues of representation.
It’s not that queer characters should never ever die. It’s that we haven’t yet reached a point where that one queer character’s death (and it’s not just one) is incidental because there are so many other queer characters on the screen.
Shows like Orange is the New Black, Sleepy Hollow, How to Get Away with Murder, and Brooklyn Nine-Nine all have multiple POC in lead roles. But there is much further to go.
Stephanie Beatriz (who plays Rosa Diaz on Brooklyn Nine-Nine) wrote about how she was shocked to even get the role because a Latina actress (Melissa Fumero who plays Amy Santiago) had already been cast. How messed up is that?
LGBTQ+ representation is arguably even worse. In fact, the only show I can think of that is currently on air that has more than one main queer character is Orange is the New Black. (Correct me if I’m wrong. Please.) And bisexual characters are even rarer than gay & lesbian characters. Not to mention the bisexual erasure that happens, when a character who has previously had feelings-for-or-relationships-with people of one gender, begins to have feelings-for-or-a-relationship-with someone of another gender, and is declared to have “become” gay without even acknowledging the possibility that their sexuality is more fluid than that. (Willow “gay now” Rosenberg from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Ramona “it was just a phase” Flowers from Scott Pilgrim both spring to mind.)
GLAAD in their Hollywood survey pointed out “that studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises" in particular. Hmm.
On Agents of SHIELD, we had two in-charge, incredible, fierce lesbian agents who were both killed off for shock value & possibly Hunter’s angst, who weren’t even given the screen time to establish their sexualities or relationship.
On Arrow, we had a kick-ass, powerful, inspiring, bisexual hero who was literally thrown away in the garbage to further Oliver’s angst and to fuel Laurel’s evolution into Black Canary.
I say again, STOP KILLING QUEER CHARACTERS.

ALLLLLLL OF THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Also let’s not forget that Black Canary explicitly was not labeled bisexual because the writers and producers "really wanted to approach it like not be salacious, and be sensitive, and be realistic."

“‘studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises’ in particular.”
what the ever loving FUCK

If killing one queer character/character of color/character who is a positive representation of their religion/etc. means literally reducing the number of available characters by 10% or more (usually more), THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN OPTION FOR THE CHOPPING BLOCK.
Zoom Info
seananmcguire:

candycornpizza:

a-little-bi-furious:

absentlyabbie:

tosailuponthesea:

tomasthebreaker:

How about no? Queer characters are humans. Humans die. That’s like me saying “Don’t kill black or Hispanic characters because I’m black and Hispanic or because they’re black and hispanic”. Characters die. It sucks.

Yes, it does suck. Because representation of minority groups matters. When queer characters are consistently used to prop up straight leads and killed off to give their straight counter-parts angsty storylines, it is a problem.
And yes, it is actually very much like saying “don’t kill black or Latin@ characters.” Because those groups also suffer from issues of representation.
It’s not that queer characters should never ever die. It’s that we haven’t yet reached a point where that one queer character’s death (and it’s not just one) is incidental because there are so many other queer characters on the screen.
Shows like Orange is the New Black, Sleepy Hollow, How to Get Away with Murder, and Brooklyn Nine-Nine all have multiple POC in lead roles. But there is much further to go.
Stephanie Beatriz (who plays Rosa Diaz on Brooklyn Nine-Nine) wrote about how she was shocked to even get the role because a Latina actress (Melissa Fumero who plays Amy Santiago) had already been cast. How messed up is that?
LGBTQ+ representation is arguably even worse. In fact, the only show I can think of that is currently on air that has more than one main queer character is Orange is the New Black. (Correct me if I’m wrong. Please.) And bisexual characters are even rarer than gay & lesbian characters. Not to mention the bisexual erasure that happens, when a character who has previously had feelings-for-or-relationships-with people of one gender, begins to have feelings-for-or-a-relationship-with someone of another gender, and is declared to have “become” gay without even acknowledging the possibility that their sexuality is more fluid than that. (Willow “gay now” Rosenberg from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Ramona “it was just a phase” Flowers from Scott Pilgrim both spring to mind.)
GLAAD in their Hollywood survey pointed out “that studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises" in particular. Hmm.
On Agents of SHIELD, we had two in-charge, incredible, fierce lesbian agents who were both killed off for shock value & possibly Hunter’s angst, who weren’t even given the screen time to establish their sexualities or relationship.
On Arrow, we had a kick-ass, powerful, inspiring, bisexual hero who was literally thrown away in the garbage to further Oliver’s angst and to fuel Laurel’s evolution into Black Canary.
I say again, STOP KILLING QUEER CHARACTERS.

ALLLLLLL OF THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Also let’s not forget that Black Canary explicitly was not labeled bisexual because the writers and producers "really wanted to approach it like not be salacious, and be sensitive, and be realistic."

“‘studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises’ in particular.”
what the ever loving FUCK

If killing one queer character/character of color/character who is a positive representation of their religion/etc. means literally reducing the number of available characters by 10% or more (usually more), THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN OPTION FOR THE CHOPPING BLOCK.
Zoom Info

seananmcguire:

candycornpizza:

a-little-bi-furious:

absentlyabbie:

tosailuponthesea:

tomasthebreaker:

How about no? Queer characters are humans. Humans die. That’s like me saying “Don’t kill black or Hispanic characters because I’m black and Hispanic or because they’re black and hispanic”. Characters die. It sucks.

Yes, it does suck. Because representation of minority groups matters. When queer characters are consistently used to prop up straight leads and killed off to give their straight counter-parts angsty storylines, it is a problem.

And yes, it is actually very much like saying “don’t kill black or Latin@ characters.” Because those groups also suffer from issues of representation.

It’s not that queer characters should never ever die. It’s that we haven’t yet reached a point where that one queer character’s death (and it’s not just one) is incidental because there are so many other queer characters on the screen.

Shows like Orange is the New Black, Sleepy Hollow, How to Get Away with Murder, and Brooklyn Nine-Nine all have multiple POC in lead roles. But there is much further to go.

Stephanie Beatriz (who plays Rosa Diaz on Brooklyn Nine-Nine) wrote about how she was shocked to even get the role because a Latina actress (Melissa Fumero who plays Amy Santiago) had already been cast. How messed up is that?

LGBTQ+ representation is arguably even worse. In fact, the only show I can think of that is currently on air that has more than one main queer character is Orange is the New Black. (Correct me if I’m wrong. Please.) And bisexual characters are even rarer than gay & lesbian characters. Not to mention the bisexual erasure that happens, when a character who has previously had feelings-for-or-relationships-with people of one gender, begins to have feelings-for-or-a-relationship-with someone of another gender, and is declared to have “become” gay without even acknowledging the possibility that their sexuality is more fluid than that. (Willow “gay now” Rosenberg from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Ramona “it was just a phase” Flowers from Scott Pilgrim both spring to mind.)

GLAAD in their Hollywood survey pointed out “that studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises" in particular. Hmm.

On Agents of SHIELD, we had two in-charge, incredible, fierce lesbian agents who were both killed off for shock value & possibly Hunter’s angst, who weren’t even given the screen time to establish their sexualities or relationship.

On Arrow, we had a kick-ass, powerful, inspiring, bisexual hero who was literally thrown away in the garbage to further Oliver’s angst and to fuel Laurel’s evolution into Black Canary.

I say again, STOP KILLING QUEER CHARACTERS.

ALLLLLLL OF THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Also let’s not forget that Black Canary explicitly was not labeled bisexual because the writers and producers "really wanted to approach it like not be salacious, and be sensitive, and be realistic."

“‘studios seemed ‘reluctant’ to include LGBT characters in comic book adaptations and action franchises’ in particular.”

what the ever loving FUCK

If killing one queer character/character of color/character who is a positive representation of their religion/etc. means literally reducing the number of available characters by 10% or more (usually more), THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN OPTION FOR THE CHOPPING BLOCK.