hello, i am elipheleh, i use they/them & i am an adult!
this blog is an attempt to have every gifset collated - predominantly from the rwrbedit tag, but some others too. also the incorrect posts which i adore. i've also archived promo & behind the scenes posts, making sure i'm adding alt text so everyone can access the media.
i am now re-sharing posts from the start of the rwrbedit tag (from my archives). they're tagged "q mark 2, reblogging from the start, [month, year]".
any posts about the sequel are tagged with "rwrb2" and "rwrw" at present.
i wrote a series where we learnt together. i have more ideas hopefully to come.
i add alt text to my posts & you should too.
taglist under the cut:
My Stuff:
#elio’s - my posts, whatever that’s mine originally
#elio is talking - my text posts
#elio is being negative - grumping
#elio’s meta - my meta content
#not rwrb - mostly rwrb adjacent stuff (e.g. handsome devil, mary & george, tioy)
General Sorting Tags:
#a series of learning about things that are referenced in the book
#edit - things people have created
#art - art people have created
#book - when the book & film are overlapping
#meta - commentary about scenes, about the film, etc
#stills - images
#clip - videos
#incorrects - text posts pasted on images etc
#fanvid
#waterloo letters - the quotes from henry & alex’s emails & other similar quotes attached to imagery.
#rwrb music - music from the book, and later also from the film.
#rwrb instagram - posts from the character’s instagram accounts.
-----
#posters - pre-release posters
#trailer - posts that are from the trailer, gifs etc
#rwrb2 / #rwrw - posts about the sequel (for now) (12-May-24)
this is part of a series for pride month giving a base level of information about the queer history mentioned in red, white and royal blue by casey mcquiston. the masterpost is here. if you want to follow the series, i am using the tag "elio is talking about queer history".
This post is very long, so I have inserted a 'read more' bar earlier than in others. There is more content under the cut this time, not just the sources/additional reading.
Obergefell v. Hodges is the proper title of the SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) decision of 2015 Alex references. This case made same-sex marriage legal and recognised on a federal level, at a majority vote of 5-4.
The two questions presented were:
Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex? Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state?
The court held that:
The Fourteenth Amendment requires a State to license a marriage between two people of the same sex and to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-State.
-----
While that covers the decision itself, I'm going to take the opportunity to talk more broadly about the history of same-sex marriage in the USA, leading up to and including Obergefell.
The oldest (dubiously) legal same-sex marriage was between Jack Baker and Michael McConnell, in 1971. Baker discovered that the Minnesota marriage laws did not specify gender, and as such filed for a marriage license for himself & McConnell. When they were declined, they took the case to the Minnesota Supreme Court, who ruled that marriage was to be between a man & a woman. They appealed this to the United States Supreme Court who, in the case Baker v Nelson, ruled that it was not a federal issue, but rather a states issue. This would later be used as precedence when the case of same-sex marriage's legality came up again, in 2014. After some complicated loophole use - including an adoption and legal name change - they were able to apply for, and receive, a marriage license and were married by a Methodist minister in September 1971.
In 1996, President Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act into federal law. This banned federal recognition of marriages which were not between a man and a woman, and allowed states to not recognise same-sex marriages which had been legally granted in other states. Following the passing of the Defense of Marriage Act, forty states introduced state level bans on same-sex marriage.
Baker v. Vermont - a different Baker from above - in 1999 led to the court to order Vermont legislature to either enact same-sex marriage, or to create an equivalent alternative. A key argument by the attorney for the plaintiffs was that Vermont allowed same-sex partners to raise children - conceived both by natural and artificial means, or adopted - but did not allow them the legal security of marriage. 'On December 20, 1999, the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that the denial of marriage benefits to same-sex partners was a violation of the state constitution.' (wikipedia) The following year, the Vermont Legislature created civil unions for same sex couples, but while doing so also defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman, something that previously was not included in the statute.
In 2003, in the case of Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health, the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that the state must legally recognise same-sex marriage after recognising that civil unions would create a separate and unequal status. In the six months after same-sex marriage was legalised, approximately 6,100 marriages took place.
Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Public Health legalised marriage regardless of gender in Connecticut in 2008. 1,746 couples married in the first year. In April 2009, Varnum v. Brien legalised same-sex marriage in Iowa. 2,020 couples married in the first year, many from neighbouring states.
Same-sex marriage became legal in Vermont in September 2009, the first state to introduce it without a Court decision. The first couple to marry in Vermont were Bill Sullivan (né Slimback) and Bob Sullivan.
I'm not going to continue listing them all one by one, but by 2013, same-sex marriage was legal in the following states: Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, District of Columbia, New York, Maine, Maryland, Washington (state), Rhode Island, Delaware, Minnesota.
However, in 2013, United States v. Windsor found that section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act - the denial of federal recognition of same-sex marriages - was unconstitutional. This meant that same-sex marriages, performed in states where it was legal, were federally recognised.
The first case to use the precedence set by Windsor was in New Jersey. Same-sex couples were able to get a civil union in NJ, but with the recognition of same-sex marriage at the federal level it was successfully argued that this meant civil unions were not granted the same rights as marriages. Many states then used this logic as a pathway to legalising same-sex marriage, up until Obergefell passed, with 38 states (& DC and Guam) having some level of legal marriage for same-sex couples.(see "local laws prior to obergefell" in the links below for a full table of states marriage laws)
The path to same-sex marriage in California is slightly more complicated. Initially California was one of the first states to legalise same-sex marriage, in June 2008. However, in November of the same year, the issuing of licenses to same-sex couples was halted through the use of Proposition 8. Proposition 8 was a ballot referendum - that is, voted on by the California voters - which would add the proviso that marriage was only between a man & a woman to the state constitution. It passed with a 52% majority and while previous marriages were not invalidated, no more were granted. The US Supreme Court, in Hollingsworth v. Perry, deemed that Prop 8 was unconstitutional & that the original ruling from 2010 (Perry v. Schwarzenegger - yes, that Schwarzenegger) held and that Proposition 8 was violating the U.S. constitution.
Jim Obergefell, of Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015.
Obergefell v. Hodges was the end result of six individual lawsuits from different states - Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee. All of the plaintiffs won their cases, but appeals meant that they were heard in the Sixth Circuit federal court, and some were consolidated due to their similarity. They ruled ultimately that same-sex marriage bans were not unconstitutional, and the original result was overturned. In January, 2015, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeals and consolidated the four cases which challenged same-sex marriage bans into one case. The Court narrowed down the arguments to two:
1. Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex? 2. Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state?
On the 26th of June, 2015, the US Supreme Court held that the 14th Amendment requires all states to both grant same-sex marriage licenses, and to recognise marriages granted in other states. This legalised same-sex marriage federally and overruled the Defense of Marriage Act.
---
In 2022, following comments from SCOTUS Justice Thomas, Congress passed the Respect For Marriage Act. This legally repealed the Defense of Marriage act, as well as compelling all states and territories to recognise the validity of both same-sex and interracial marriage, if they were performed in a place where it was legal.
-------------------------------------------------
Sources:
Baker & McConnell Marriage
Wikipedia - Timeline of same-sex marriage in the United States
Wikipedia - Baker v Vermont
Wikipedia - Goodridge v. Department of Public Health
Wikipedia - Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Public Health
Wikipedia - Same-sex marriage in Iowa
Wikipedia - Same-sex marriage in Vermont
Wikipedia - Same-sex marriage in New Hampshire
Wikipedia - United States v Windsor
Wikipedia - Obegerfell v Hodges
Wikipedia - Respect for Marriage Act
Additional Reading:
Britannica - Defense of Marriage Act
Howard University - Proposition 8
Wikipedia - 8 (play) - this will need some content warnings.
NYACLU - UNITED STATES V. WINDSOR (CHALLENGING THE FEDERAL "DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT")
Honors Thesis, 2014 - How the Case United States v. Windsor Paved the Way for Same-Sex Marriage Legalization in the United States
The New Yorker, 2014 - The Growing Impact of the Supreme Court’s Gay-Marriage Ruling
Wikipedia - Local Laws prior to Obergefell (should link directly, if not it's under "Legal Issues")
Wikipedia - Sixth Circuit
Huffington Post, 2015 - Meet The Couples Fighting To Make Marriage Equality The Law Of The Land
Washington Post, 2015 - Supreme Court rules gay couples nationwide have a right to marry
PBS Youtube - Jim Obergefell responds to Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage
Wikipedia - Jim Obergefell
Howard University - A Brief History of Civil Rights in the United States: Obergefell v. Hodges
NBC Youtube - Supreme Court Strikes Down Same-Sex Marriage Ban | NBC Nightly News
Queer History in Red, White & Royal Blue (Masterpost)
in 2023, ahead of the release of the film adaptation of Casey McQuiston's Red, White & Royal Blue, i wrote a series of posts giving context to references they used in the novel. while we wait for the release of the second film, i thought i would spend pride month reposting the posts that contextualise things alex mentions in chapter 7 when coming to understand his connection to the queer community and history as someone who is newly identifying as a bisexual man.
--
i am aiming to post these roughly every three days, and the links will be added below - this post will function as a masterlist. if you would like to track a tag, i will be using "elio is talking about queer history".
--
Stonewall
SCOTUS decision, 2015
Walt Whitman
Laws of Illinois, 1961
The White Night Riot
Paris is Burning
David Wojnarowicz - Photo from the '80s
--
if you enjoyed this series, reblogging is vital to helping the posts reach beyond just my followers. please take a second to share the posts around, it's so important for queer history to not be lost - especially as we see an uptake in suppression of queer existence. pride month is a perfect time to learn more about our history.
this is part of a series for pride month giving a base level of information about the queer history mentioned in red, white and royal blue by casey mcquiston. the masterpost is here. if you want to follow the series, i am using the tag "elio is talking about queer history".
Stonewall is one of the more well known events, but that doesn't mean that everyone knows what happened, so it's still important - I think - to cover it.
‘Stonewall’ is used by Alex to refer to the Stonewall Riots, which began on the 28th of June, 1969. Patrons of the Stonewall Inn in Greenwich Village, New York City, fought back after a regular police raid, triggering subsequent nights of riots. The police were targeting gay bars, and had been for years. They would raid gay establishments and arrest anyone who wasn’t wearing three items of clothing that complied with their gender, in accordance with New York State law. Unfortunately, the catalyst for why the patrons fought back that night is heavily disputed, even from people present, and there is no clear answer why. Some say that a lesbian began the riot by fighting back against a policeman who was 'mauling' her, others say a trans person hit a policeman - some think that was Tammy Novak, who fought back when a cop tried to push her into a police van. What is known is that patrons refused to provide identification, and others refused to go with police. Those who weren't arrested didn't disperse as usual, but rather gathered outside the Inn watching their peers being arrested. At some point, as mentioned above, the riot began and violence broke out. The police, in trying to restrain some of the crowd, knocked people down - which only increased the anger of the crowd.
Michael Fader talks about the mood:
We all had a collective feeling like we'd had enough of this kind of shit. It wasn't anything tangible anybody said to anyone else, it was just kind of like everything over the years had come to a head on that one particular night in the one particular place and it was not an organized demonstration ... Everyone in the crowd felt that we were never going to go back. It was like the last straw. It was time to reclaim something that had always been taken from us ... All kinds of people, all different reasons, but mostly it was total outrage, anger, sorrow, everything combined, and everything just kind of ran its course.
The riots continued into the early hours of the morning, thirteen people had been arrested and some of the crowd were hospitalised. Rioting continued the following nights, but so too did the desire to organise and take action to secure gay liberation. By 1974, five years later, there were more than 800 gay organisations - compared to the 50 that pre-dated the riots.
The above image is the only known photo taken during the first night of the riots. It shows the homeless gay youth who stayed nearby the Stonewall Inn fighting with police.
-----
There is an ongoing debate over the importance of Stonewall within queer history. It has become synonymous with the "origin" of the gay rights movement, something which many of those involved with early activism disagree with. In the years preceding Stonewall, activists were working towards gay liberation through various different methods.
The Mattachine Society, founded in 1950 in Los Angeles by Harry Hay (and other, unnamed, friends), but spread nationally, had been carrying out "Sip-in's" in New York in an attempt to legalise gay bars. The State Liquor Authority had been denying licenses to bars which served gay people in an attempt to rid the streets of queer people & others who were seen by politicians as "undesirables". They planned that members of The Mattachine Society would enter the bar, announce their homosexuality, and wait to see if they were served. If they were not, they then would file a complaint against the bar and - more importantly - the State Liquor Authority for violating their constitutional right to free assembly & equal accommodation. Bars had been using the State Liquor Authority's requirements of "orderly conduct" to refuse service. Queer encounters between two men were classed as "disorderly", enabling the bars to discriminate against gay people. In 1966, the highest court in New York ruled in their favour, saying that the SLA could not revoke a license on the basis of homosexual solicitation.
There were many other ways queer activism was being carried out, many successful, but it would make this post much too long if I were to list it all. It’s all reasonably easy to find online, the Library of Congress link below has some useful information.
The work carried out by gay activists, especially since the 1950s, had created a point where all that was needed to ignite the gay liberation movement was one event that empowered gay men and women to band together and fight for their rights. Scholars tend to argue that the Stonewall Riots were that catalyst, especially as the media coverage meant queer Americans saw clearly that there were others fighting for their rights, and there were others who were like them.
Sources:
Stonewall Origins, Time
SLA Sip In's - Stonewall. Carter 2005, page 50
The Gay ‘Sip-In’ that Drew from the Civil Rights Movement to Fight Discrimination - History (via archive.org)
Wider information - Stonewall. Carter.
Fader Quote - Stonewall. Carter - from wikipedia
Additional Reading:
JSTOR - The Stonewall Riots didn't start the Gay Rights Movement
Time - 'The Beginning of a Conversation': What It Was Like to Be an LGBTQ Activist Before Stonewall
Library of Congress - LGBTQIA+ Studies: A Resource Guide
i’m planning on reposting (not reblogging) my series about queer history references in rwrb the book through the month. it might take a little longer than i’d like - i live with very limited energy - but i’m hoping to get them all out this month. i’d really appreciate if you reblog them when the time comes, it’s so important to reblog things to give them more reach & queer history is such an important topic, especially now.
as i already have a masterlist of my music posts collecting previous songs casey has discussed in the context of acd (& henry) which includes my own spotify playlists of those songs, i've added these to a new spotify playlist rather than posting all of the story screenshots.
wrote and created all that to find that casey posted their own playlist... it's here & the only differences are yes i picked wrong it shouldve been extended spanish, and theirs excludes their bonus 28th 'bed chem' one:
aww i just got my first ‘sorry i accidentally reported ur blog uwu just give me ur email and password and ill fix it’ (well i assume thats what happens, i shut it down immediately so idk). i feel so honoured.
anyway, it’s always a good time to remind people about scams on tumblr (link to tumblr help) and how you should be very careful with where you log in and who you share things with. if you have any worries about a dm then contact the official tumblr report lines, don’t try and resolve it yourself, and you should never take it off tumblr or click anything you’re not sure is legit. better to be cautious than to lose your blog.
rwrbonprime [instagram]: we're SO beyond back. #RWRWedding is officially in production!
taylor and nick on set (the palace?) talking to the camera, with cuts to various behind the scenes clips while they talk. the back of a directors chair with the logo of red white and royal wedding (text with a little crown above 'wedding'); taylor being filmed on a bed holding up his phone while shirtless; taylor laughing at something nick has said; taylor and nick talking behind the cameras. the final screen shows the title of the film & "in production now".
happy new year friends & welcome in to the year of rwrb2.
just some expectation setting - i will be reblogging or posting behind the scenes stuff once we start getting it, but i will very much not be rushing to. my intent behind posting insta & twt content has always been to ensure all content is available with alt text & while i would love to be quick enough that it gets pushed to the top of the tags, i know it isn't feasible for me right now.
i have incredibly limited energy & the adrenaline of trying to get stuff posted and uploaded quickly is just going to wreck me. so instead, i'll post stuff when i can & ensure there is alt text involved - and hopefully people will choose to reblog that, but if not at least i know there is a space online with it posted.
i will also - once the movie is out!! - be reblogging the gifs in the rwrbedit tag (or whatever the tag becomes (rwrwedit?) but again, timing on that will be what it is. i am excited to figure out a new tagging system, but we shall see where that goes.
i am looking forward to the forthcoming content & hopefully we will be well fed <3
happy new year friends & welcome in to the year of rwrb2.
just some expectation setting - i will be reblogging or posting behind the scenes stuff once we start getting it, but i will very much not be rushing to. my intent behind posting insta & twt content has always been to ensure all content is available with alt text & while i would love to be quick enough that it gets pushed to the top of the tags, i know it isn't feasible for me right now.
i have incredibly limited energy & the adrenaline of trying to get stuff posted and uploaded quickly is just going to wreck me. so instead, i'll post stuff when i can & ensure there is alt text involved - and hopefully people will choose to reblog that, but if not at least i know there is a space online with it posted.
i will also - once the movie is out!! - be reblogging the gifs in the rwrbedit tag (or whatever the tag becomes (rwrwedit?) but again, timing on that will be what it is. i am excited to figure out a new tagging system, but we shall see where that goes.
i am looking forward to the forthcoming content & hopefully we will be well fed <3
