Day 142
Continuing the eepy theme
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
ojovivo
No title available
No title available

oozey mess
Show & Tell
dirt enthusiast

roma★
taylor price
Not today Justin
TVSTRANGERTHINGS

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year

Origami Around

pixel skylines
Xuebing Du

if i look back, i am lost
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
RMH
KIROKAZE

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom

seen from Singapore
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom

seen from North Macedonia

seen from Singapore
seen from Australia
seen from North Macedonia
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from North Macedonia

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
@caleb-management
Day 142
Continuing the eepy theme
Commission for @rain-fall-down. I hope you like it!!
Commissions
adam is straight or gay depending on whether hickey is home when you ask
shout out adam nagaitis that man is gay or straight depending
love men who fall into "my girl is mad at me i hope i die" category but who also regularly do things to piss their girl off. duality of man
Once when I was in undergrad, someone described something as “problematic” in class and our professor was like, “That’s cool, but ‘problematic’ doesn’t really mean anything. It means that the thing you’re describing has a problem, and in and of itself that’s not bad. Art, especially, should always have problems, or else it’s not interesting and not art, either. It sounds like you’re trying to say that this is bad, but you don’t want to say ‘bad.’ Is that right?”
So from then on whenever one of us called something problematic, he would make us talk it out until we could name the “bad” thing we were hinting at. In this particular class, 7/10 it was some type of oppression, and the remainder was like, “I’m uncomfortable because this is very new/confusing/pushing boundaries that made me feel safe.”
Once we stopped calling things “problematic” and stopping at that, class got way more interesting and... we all had to say, like, “that’s racist” or “that’s misogynistic” or “ew capitalism gross” out loud, which a lot of us had never done in a classroom before. Or we had to be like, “Uhhh... I’m not sure what’s so bad?” and confront our own beliefs and that was maybe even more useful.
Anyway. Whenever I see the word problematic, I can’t help but think of this professor being like, “Good starting point, now let’s get specific.” I think when we have to commit to saying “that’s ___” it requires a lot more careful thought about the truth and impact and complexities of whatever we’re claiming. Sometimes there really is some bullshit afoot, and also sometimes it’s art, and it should be full of problems, because that’s what art is.
RPDR ALL STARS 11.05 ★ "How-To Videos"
can't wait to say "during pride month?" at every minor inconvenience all of next month
Those two…
...finally together
My Terror fandom Hot Take is that I think it’s weird how little anyone into the real life history side cares about the Inuit who interacted with the FE. Lots of people dig in to the backgrounds of Tozer’s siblings or Irving’s friends, but nobody seems to have heard of Kokleearngnun or Too-shoo-art-thariu. I’ve observed a real lack of curiosity.
Ok, maybe not that weird, seeing as how I’ve blocked multiple people over the years for saying things like “the Inuit were/are liars”. When you’re saying stuff that was considered racist by some Victorians, it’s time to reconsider your views!
i think this is a fair take/critique that i myself can also learn from! for my part i’m very interested in ada blackjack (though i know she’s not involved with the FE), and have also noticed how non-white figures in polar history (e.g., matthew henson) receive relatively so little attention despite how compelling their lives and the obstacles they overcame are. this is not to say everyone has to let go of their white boy blorbo/interest, but expanding your mind beyond them is both imperative and rewarding!
also yeah, absolutely fuck anyone who discounts the firsthand testimonies of the inuit. i’d block their asses too 💯
Yes!
In case anyone is interested, and you don’t fancy crawling through Charles Francis Hall’s journals yourself, I’ll give a brief summary of these two men’s most significant interactions.
Kokleearngnun told Hall about seeing a white man’s ship that became overwhelmed with ice and sank. He met a man by the name of Aglooka and a “pee-e-tu” (commonly interpreted to be a steward or non-seaman) who was called “Nar-tar”. Hall believed that that was a way of pronouncing “doctor”. Kokleearngnun was given two spoons with the initials FRMC stamped on them.
He met qallunaat at least twice (IIRC). I think that the most interesting testimony he gave was set aboard a ship. It’s quite controversial account, but I strongly believe that it is of the FE rather than of a different expedition. Hall, April 1866:
The Pelly Bay men described the Esh-emut-ta as an old man with broad shoulders, thick and heavier set than Hall, with gray hair, full face, and bald head. He was always wearing something over his eyes (spectacles, as Too-koo-li-too interpreted it), was quite lame, and appeared sick when they last saw him. He was very kind to the Innuits;—always wanting them to eat something. Ag-loo-ka (Crozier) and another man would go and do everything that Too-loo-ark told them, just like boys; he was a very cheerful man, always laughing; everybody liked him—all the kob-lu-nas and all the Innuits. Kok-lee-arng-nun showed how Too-loo-ark and Ag-loo-ka used to meet him. They would take hold of his hand, giving it a few warm and friendly shakes, and Too-loo-ark would say, “Ma-my-too-mig-tey-ma.” Ag-loo-ka’s hand-shaking was short and jerky, and he would only say, “Man-nig-too-mé.” “After the first summer and first winter, they saw no more of Too-loo-ark; then Ag-loo-ka (Crozier) was the Esh-e-mut-ta.”
Kokleearngnun's wife, Koo-narg, as well as several other women, also took tea aboard the ship with Toolooark, who gave them all ulus and, to Koo-narg, a silver pocket watch. It’s curious, because in the accounts from other expeditions, the British mostly gave the Inuit worthless (and sometimes insulting) gifts in exchange for information and items (e.g. pieces of old barrel).
Meanwhile, Too-shoo-art-thar-u definitely met the men after they abandoned ship. His group hadn’t heard that there were qallunaat on the island, so they sent their two bravest hunters (Ow-wer and Too-shoo-art-thar-u) (to use Hall’s renderings of their names) to go and investigate. They meet them at an ice crack, putting distance between them; one of the white men had a gun pointing at the hunters, but the man who was in front told him to put it down. He showed them an ulu and used it to make a line in the snow. He then pantomimed asking for something to eat. Too-shoo-art-thar-u called this first man “Aglooka”. Aglooka couldn’t speak much Inuktitut, but Too-shoo-art-thar-u eventually understood that he had come from two ships up north that had been crushed in ice. Quoting Hall again:
After this first interview the two men went ashore with the Innuits. While Aglooka was trying to talk with the Innuits (Ow-wer [my note: probably a shortening of Ukuararssuk] & Too-shoo-art-thar-u), the party with the boat and one other sledge passed by going a little lower down to a point or cape of the little bay where they then were. On getting ashore Aglooka wanted everything - every pack opened & opened them himself, the dogs' saddle bag packs, the women's packs and the men's packs, for everything was ready for making a journey across the land. Aglooka wanted meat & for this he wanted every pack opened. The Innuits were all willing he should do as he did.
After each man Innuit had given him some seal meat, it was all put on a (one) dog's back & then by the request of Aglooka all 4 Innuit men with the dog laden with meat went down with Aglooka and the man with him to where the men and the boat where, the men erecting a tent. As they approached the tent, one man came out to meet them. Aglooka spoke to the men when he and the Innuits were near the tent. The men along side the tent and the men alongside of the boat stood in line holding up their arms and open hands above their heads, showing they had nothing (that is no weapons) about them.
The men stayed for a bit. One of them caught a fish and one shot down a bird. In exchange for helping them, Aglooka handed out gifts.
The strange thing is that, several years earlier, in 1864, Hall heard a different story from the one above. That one was given by Too-shoo-art-thariu's cousins, and in it the white men stay for one night. The 1864 testimony was given by Too-shoo-art-thariu's mother and son. In that one, the white men stay all winter. They travel with Too-shoo-art-thariu and his family. They hunted and travelled in an inflatable boat. One of them died of illness, and the others left so that they could go back to their country. In thanks, Aglooka offered Too-shoo-art-thariu his rifle - Too-shoo-art-thariu turned it down because he didn’t know how to use it, so Aglooka gave him a “long knife” instead.
Ten years later, Schwatka met Ahlangyah, his wife, who claimed that the family had met ten qallunaat who stayed for five days. Just like in the previous accounts, two of the men were called Aglooka and Toolooah, but their physical descriptions don’t match Kokleearngnun's descriptions of the men he had dinner with. Furthermore, Rasmussen collected the testimony of a man whose father (Mangaq) had been with the group. It has similar features - the hunters meet the white men at a crack in the ice, the qallunaat (three this time) stay in their own tent (which is peculiar because it is not made of animal skins), they say their ships were crushed by the ice, they exchanged a knife for seal meat, and the white men leave because they want to go home. Rasmussen, as quoted in Unravelling the Franklin Mystery by Dave Woodman:
Father and his people would willingly have helped the white men, but could not understand them; they tried to explain themselves by signs, and in fact learned to know a lot by this means. They had once been many they said; now they were only few, and they had left their ship out in the pack-ice. They pointed to the south, and it was understood that they wanted to go home overland. They were not met again, and no one knows where they went to.
However, there was not a caribou hunt like in the first account, and this time they share a tent with Mangaq and the white men stay at least three days.
I’ll admit, I chose Too-shoo-art-thar-u at sort of random, because he’s a candidate for the man who was given the sword of a great officer , but when I checked my books and notes the story turned out to be more complicated than I remembered! But I decided to relay it to show everyone how difficult it can be to interpret Inuit testimony.
If you want to learn more, the best secondary sources with free pdfs of them floating around tumblr are Unravelling the Franklin Mystery by David Woodman and Encounters on the Passage: Inuit Meet the Explorers by Dorothy Harley Eber (slightly problematic in that it uses people’s Christian names instead of their proper names, so please ignore them). For an Inuit perspective, and what a lot of people say is the best book, there is The Land Was Always Used: An Inuit Oral History of the Franklin Expedition (if you have £40 to spare).
i've been phasing the phrase 'google it' out of my vocabulary and going back to 'look it up'. fuck you youve lost your generic trademark privileges
they seriously expected us to worship cops & soldiers when street cleaners and sanitation workers exist? fuck off i know who my heroes are
"listen to indigenous voices"
Here's one.
Aanin.
In Ojibwe my native language it's a greeting that usually is just meant to say hi or welcome. But it's older translation means something that's more like "I see your light" or "I see you."
It was a way of recognizing a person while also showing respect for their personhood.
I'm two spirit.
Do you see me? Do you see my light? If I said aanin to you, could you say it back?
Do you want to?
•••
If studies on gender, work/job inequalities, sexuality, hate crimes, assault, population, education levels, or other demographic based statistics include you then you have the privilege of being seen within systemic oppression.
Perhaps you entirely lack systemic power, but at the very least you don't lack visibility. You have the ability to reference objective sources that you can use to prove that not only your oppression exists, but that you exist and deserve to be cared about.
I'm two spirit which makes me part of a demographic that not only is never included in studies or statistics, but that is also left out of even feminist analysis. The exception to that being when the person writing the analysis is intentionally making the point that white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, and/or racism are all tools of colonialism that must be deconstructed.
Anti-colonial understandings should be the standard of feminist and gender analysis, especially if feminism is to serve all women.
There are so, so many indigenous genders and expressions that are never ever talked about, known, or accepted outside of their own tribes or people.
This is a failing.
The vague expression that "queer ppl have always been here" is a popular slogan and so often indigenous people are used like tools to prove that point, but nobody can name what makes us queer or asks if we even want to be considered queer. Nobody seems to notice the way we are only ever acknowledged to prove the important of someone else.
To know nothing about us, our values, the ways we serve our communities, or our personhood while using us as tools in debates is just another racist way objectifying us without having to actually care about us.
So few people stop to think about the word queer itself, who it describes, or what queer people are being compared to, where those things come from, or perhaps most importantly: why. So few people stop to think about those of us who consider ourselves outside of all that. By that I mean queerness, being straight, the definitions of man and woman, being cis, etc. Those are all labels and ideas that stem from a colonial and oppressive framework of understanding gender, sexuality, societal expectations, and identity.
So it makes sense that this framework never ever includes people like me, someone from a people that colonialism actively targeted from the very beginning.
I say knowing exactly how indigenous kids were forced to conform to these standards in boarding & residential schools.
So it isn't a mistake nor is it a coincidence that people with indigenous genders, sexualities, or identities are never included.
They still don't want us to exist.
I know it seems like I'm asking for acceptance into that framework. So let me be clear that I am absolutely not. I don't want my indigeneity to be absorbed into the same exact framework that has always sought to oppress, suppress, subjugate, and erase my people.
I don't want my oppression to be inclusive of me. What I want is liberation and not just for me but for all indigenous peoples regardless of their gender, sexuality, or identity.
And to have that first we must be recognized, cared about, heard.
We need to be seen.
See us.
quick drawing of silna!! i havent drawn her b4…, very fun to draw her
Good morning, what the fuck was I cooking in here
Over a thousand Rikshospitalet patients were included in scientific studies without consent. Now, researchers await the National Research Et
The country of Norway, for whom the prime minister is named Jonas Gahr Støre
A man I'VE MET, shaken his hand, and walked with him during Pride
THIS country, is doing harm to transgender people. And they're doing it intentionally.
Did you know you can contact the office of the Prime minister
Yknow I'm sure they don't get that many emails.
They probably should. They need to care. Let's see if they care about the harm they're intentionally causing.
Or more specifically:
Let's see what they say when they have to say it out loud to every queer person on the planet.
Jonas. You're really gonna walk with me at Pride
And pull this shit?
You think he's going to pride this year or you think he's gonna pull some excuse not to make it? Imma be there. I'm making fucking sure of it now.