As we have so recently and publicly discussed, girls and women have “anger issues” in that they are socialized to not demonstrate anger, but instead to sublimate it where it can sometimes then manifest itself as anxiety or depression. Girls are not born less angry and more anxious, they’re rewarded for being less angry and more anxious. So, it should come as no surprise to anyone that large groups of stressed out girls and women collectively facing the dissolution of a cohesive social structure might be more disposed to fall prey to mass psychosis. It is arguable that men and boys experience similarly jarring episodes of anger and anxiety-channelling mass psychosis, but we call it male aggression and fund military industrial complexes to deal with it.
–Soraya L. Chemaly, Stop Telling Girls They’re Hysterical (via sparkamovement)
Or they just shoot up suburban high schools.
ETA: Uh, none of the girls in the Salem witch trials were “killed for being non-compliant types.” They were all witnesses, not on trial. All of the people executed as a result of the witch trials were older community members.
(via ladonnapietra)
Via la.donna.pietra
I have a soft spot for the little guys in history. Don’t we all? The ones who aren’t always remembered by name, the ones without power, the common people. I mean let’s face it, that’s most of us- when I try to imagine myself living 200 years ago I can’t sum up the airs to assume I’d be born wealthy or important. If my family tree is correct, I ain’t nobody, historically speaking. So I gravitate towards these sorts of people, even if making comics about nutty kings is fun and loud and crazy.
You don’t get much more common than the soldier on the field. They are usually a statistic, or maybe a face of nobody in particular in a painting of some important battle. You see number plopped down like 156 000 Allied troops landed during the Normandy invasion, as though that were nothing. That’s a lot of regular people! I’ve always been interested in these guys and their experiences, and I’ve had this book for a while - Soldiers: An Illustrated History of Men in Battle by John Keegan and Richard Holmes. It’s actually a companion piece to a 1985 BBC documentary series of the same name. I didn’t look up the documentary until recently.
Because it’s almost as old as I am, it can be dry viewing at some points. We’re so spoiled by fancy new documentaries! But it’s pretty good all the same, and being co-written by the Famous John Keegan, who can resist? At least you know it’s got the real historical chops behind it.
I made a youtube list of the episodes I could find: Infantry, Tanks, Air Power, Fighting Spirit and Engineers. If you’re interested. Added bonus: because it’s from 1985, he has interviews with WWI veterans, which you’ll never see in anything these days.
Multiculturalism for Steampunk is starting up a weekly art challenge, and it looks promising. SO EXCITED. I’ve had a bunch of ideas for non-Western steampunk outfits floating around in my head, and it’s nice actually having a weekly deadline to motivate me to finish some of them.
This is pretty subtle in its steampunkery (read: no extranneous metal bits), but I was just trying to bring in a few western/Victorian elements to traditional Indian clothing- legomuttoned sleeves, the double breasted, collared choli, and adapting the churidar into buttoned spats.
…Also a sweet hat.
-CI think there are some colonialist questions that get raised when you incorporate specifically British Victorian elements of couture into Indian fashion? A few?
Buuuuuuut I would fight a man on a grizzly bear for this lady’s comic.
I am so glad you said this. I thought I was alone in this. British Empire, anyone? Company Rule? British Raj?
Dear internet, I shan’t assume that you all know about the British Empire. I know not everyone has the same education and it’s problematic to assume this.
But know that British rule in India lasted from around 1757 to about 1948, and that the relationship between the coloniser and colonised is extremely complicated, and still very much has real lived effects today. Sure, the outfit and character look beautiful, but I just don’t think you can go around mashing up Victorian fashion with Indian clothing just for surface steampunk elegance without encountering some problems. I can appreciate the visual qualities, but the history and meaning causes some concern.
/inb4 people start screeching that I am ~*oversensitive*~ and can’t enjoy anything :-{D
No screeching, I promise! No such thing as being oversensitive with this sort of thing. I tried to avoid choosing anything specifically British (or any of the imagery specifically associated with colonization/”exploration chic”, things like khaki and piths), and tried to make it seem like the character had agency. I definitely don’t want to pretend I’m creating this in a void, that there aren’t historical and cultural contexts surrounding the politics of dress, but was trying to integrate elements that didn’t overwhelm the original culture.
Granted, I am of the opinion that Steampunk that erases past racial greivances (i.e. alternate history where white people are awesome and never did anything wrong and we’re all best friends) is kinda shitty and naive- that’s why I drew this as a character, and not as a costume design for something I would wear (as a white chick). If one were designing a Steampunk world, it would be unfair to assume that this cultural crossover didn’t happen and wouldn’t have existed, but I honestly apologize that the original post might make it seem like this was drawn solely for aesthetic purposes- and I’d like to address that and make it clear that I am definitely trying to keep context in mind, and am happy to be called out like this.
Multiculturalism for Steampunk is starting up a weekly art challenge, and it looks promising. SO EXCITED. I’ve had a bunch of ideas for non-Western steampunk outfits floating around in my head, and it’s nice actually having a weekly deadline to motivate me to finish some of them.
This is pretty subtle in its steampunkery (read: no extranneous metal bits), but I was just trying to bring in a few western/Victorian elements to traditional Indian clothing- legomuttoned sleeves, the double breasted, collared choli, and adapting the churidar into buttoned spats.
…Also a sweet hat.
-C
Was just sent this in a note on DA. Here’s a bit of life advice- don’t treat art like it isn’t worth paying for. It’s one thing to ask someone for a favor, understanding that you’re putting them out and that they’re giving you something, but it’s another thing to act as if the privilege of making art for your wedding is payment in and of itself.
As has been said by wiser artists than I, people die of exposure.
When differentiating between cultural exchange an cultural appropriation, this first and most important thing that you have to acknowledge is that it’s fucking complicated. While there are no hard-set rules about what isn’t appropriation, there are a lot of things that definitely are…
…When it comes down to it the best way for people to avoid cultural appropriation is to do their research and listen to what people of color have to say. And it goes beyond asking [ethnicity] friends what they think because a lot of people need to learn about domination and privilege. If someone from an underprivileged group is saying something’s offensive they should be listened to when they’re often accused of nitpicking.
Bingo. The original article isn’t perfect, but that’s a pretty damn nice tl;dr summary of the thing. It’s so easy to immediately get on the defensive when someone calls you out on your (usually unintentional) racist/culturally appropriative nonsense (I am completely guilty of pulling this shit in the past), but it feels way better to actually back off and listen to what people have to say. Plus it ends up making your art/design way better, and way more informed.
Also the idea that not wearing a corset is appropriation is far fetched to me…but meh.
Also yes to this. It just seems weird to conflate the dress reform movement with racism in a way that muddies the topic at hand.
You should never read just for ‘enjoyment.’ Read to make yourself smarter! Less judgmental. More apt to understand your friends’ insane behavior, or better yet, your own. Pick ‘hard books.’ Ones you have to concentrate on while reading. And for god’s sake, don’t let me ever hear you say, ‘I can’t read fiction. I only have time for the truth.’ Fiction is the truth, fool! Ever hear of ‘literature’? That means fiction, too, stupid.
– John Waters (via ladonnapietra)(Source: The Atlantic)
Via la.donna.pietraMan, I wish squeetothegee was still around. She’d get a kick out of this video re: the ongoing conversation we had about black women getting rescued in film. (Also, it is charming.)
(Source: vimeo.com)
Via la.donna.pietra
Alice Marie recently went to see “Haywire” and wrote up her thoughts on how the movie got some things VERY right. Read her review on our main site!
What’s up guys? I wrote a thing!
I think there is a way in which society tries to push difficult things away from us, and we try and push them away ourselves and say that they are evil, we say that they are foreign, we say that they are not of us, that is not really useful to society. I’m not saying that one necessarily needs to embrace this darkness, but to know that it is of us, that it comes from us. That is really, really important because then we can look at responsibility.
– Tilda Swinton, in an interview about We Need to Talk About Kevin (via ladonnapietra)(Source: rogerebert.suntimes.com)
Via la.donna.pietraAbout me
Art, photos and various ramblings of an animation enthusiast and film graduate.
![saving the world one bit[e] at a time](http://25.media.tumblr.com/avatar_b479fa6b5e78_30.png){kind=avatar}
