"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
izzy's playlists!
Monterey Bay Aquarium
RMH
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
No title available
祝日 / Permanent Vacation
Cosimo Galluzzi
JBB: An Artblog!
KIROKAZE
$LAYYYTER
Kiana Khansmith
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
No title available
❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
cherry valley forever
Love Begins
oozey mess
Peter Solarz
tumblr dot com
seen from Germany
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Canada
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Belgium
seen from Hong Kong SAR China
seen from United States
seen from South Korea
seen from Malaysia
seen from Norway
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Canada
seen from Italy
seen from Australia
seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from United States
seen from Canada
seen from Peru
@luxcanaryfox
Hi!
I'm Emily, or Lux.
I'm an artist and aspiring bassist! My commissions are below; anyone can commission, but I do exercise discretion as to what I will draw- no NSFW or intense gore, etc if you are a minor, for example!
If ever in doubt, just send a message describing what you'd like me to draw.
Peace out!
Commissions Open! Click to see Lux's commission menu.
Since we've seen adult Ladybug, how about adult Chat Noir?
#incorrect supergirl quotes 19?
Harrowhark Nonagesimus! This is my biggest oil painting so far and I'm so proud of it!
Commissions Open! Click to see Lux's commission menu.
My commissions are wide open!
Moodboard: $7 Headshots/ Profile pics: $25 Traditional art: $100 + Lineart/sketch: $15 Digital painting: $80 + Character model sheet: $95 +
All in AUD. + indicates that price may increase depending on complexity. Please share!
Covid's cultural hangover is fascinating because on the one hand no one really wants to think about or remember it, but on the other it does seem to have permanently destroyed the last shreds of (at least) American civic society, in a way which is only becoming harder to ignore as time goes on.
It also started an ongoing health crisis that everyone is in denial of in a way that makes me feel absolutely insane. Long covid has overtaken asthma as the most common chronic illness in children, causing fatigue, depression, anxiety, and more. Disability rates in all ages have skyrocketed and will continue to grow. Every covid infection can cause long-lasting or permanent immune system and BRAIN damage and we're wondering why everyone is sick all the time and has no attention span or critical thinking skills. A study found that driving a car with acute or long covid is as dangerous as driving drunk because your brain is so fucked.
It wasn't just social isolation that's making everyone nuts, it's the wreck-your-brain-disease that everyone is spreading every day like its their full-time job. If you want to fight fascism, wear a mask!
unfun fact: any flu virus can cause this damage. even regular "normal" flu. covid seems to be very efficient at this, but influenza viruses can also cause "long flu" and months or even years of issues. i can't even count the number of people i've seen saying things like "i don't understand, it's been months and i still feel wiped out. it wasn't even covid, it was just flu!" like bruh. there's no "just" flu. flu fucks you up and can kill people too, especially the very young, very old, the chronically ill, and the immunosuppressed.
masks stop every virus, not just covid. wear a fucking mask.
I really do think the current rise of global fascism is going to be especially bad for the massive and rapidly growing population of disabled people.
Already-inadequate social safety nets are already being dismantled and I think the cultural environment is going to become more and more brutal to disabled people.
We've seen some of this already obviously. The socially-acceptable, earnest explanations that the r slur is okay now because everyone's saying it, the refusal to do literally anything to protect disabled people from covid, the austerity so many governments are enforcing on the most vulnerable members of their populations.
Politics and culture are in lockstep on the insistence that disabled people are expendable. I think this has already changed the social landscape dramatically and it's only accelerating.
As the number of people too disabled to work surges from the longer-term effects of an unusually disabling virus, as work becomes increasingly brutal and underpaid (your actual income number MAY be the same, but you can't buy as much food or housing with it, and new hires are being paid even less), as social services continue to be gutted, people who care for disabled people are going to increasingly see us as burdens and see our survival as incompatible with their own.
If you aren't yet disabled, PLEASE stand up for us and find ways to organize additional support instead of just dumping your disabled loved ones on the street to die.
"I'd never do that!" Good!! Hold on to that!! Bc the Overton window will shift your opinions and politics if you let it.
So many people who were righteously angry five years ago about governments suggesting killing disabled people was an acceptable price to keep the economy running, are now repeating those same conservative party lines almost word for word and thinking it's different because they're used to it now.
It's going to become increasingly common to abandon disabled people. It's going to be described as setting boundaries and protecting your peace and prioritizing reciprocity.
But if those are your real priorities, organizing additional support is a dramatically better option than removing every source of support a disabled person has all at once and comforting yourself with the thought that finding new help all at once is the responsibility of the newly homeless person who is seriously disabled.
Caitvi
patreon // buy prints here
drew ladrien... yeah for you... for YOU specifically
uhm... yeah :3
THEY ARE SO STUPID
Be proud
G3 frankie doodle :3
i'm sorry, both my physical & mental condition are awful right now. i appreciate you keeping me company even sparingly, it's enough not to be alone sometimes.
if you want to help otherwise just keep reaching out, make your presence known, come take another gander at this blog & all its built up. i made music, lots of videos & poetry, too many joanposts to count. stop by my asks, cash in a coupon, say anything at all
thank you so much for helping me survive during this time when every day feels like a crisis. i only wish i could have given you more
be safe for me
May the fourth be with you all my loves <3 and have a bonus MerMay Obiwan too!
i’m not really back into Star Wars atm, still floating around other things, but I couldn’t not indulge for you guys <3 love this fandom and love this community so so much
A doodle for any of the sentis :)
Can’t say no to sketching out my 3 fav characters!!!
But also had to do something dark cause I find the sentichildren story line so dark and hope they explore it more
I would like to see Mylene with the butterfly miraculous please
Okay so this was such a cute idea and I’ve been wanting to draw the butterfly Miraculous on someone and I think the sketch I came up with looks pretty cute!! I def might do a full outfit flush out later !!! Thank you for the ask
i find it interesting how people will shout "death before detransition" and then immediately say thats not what it means when one points out thats what jeanne darc chose
was inspired by this ask to make these
something something the irony of it being hard to find a depiction of jeanne being burned to death in men's clothing despite it literally being the law used to justify murdering her and the thing she explicitly refused to stop doing even if it killed her. the way the crossdressing saint isn't allowed to be depicted as anything but a beautiful pale-skinned feminine woman with long flowing hair. yet when she refused to stop wearing men's clothing she was compared to a dog returning to its own vomit.
Hate to piss on your bonfire, but the reason you probably found it difficult to find the image you mentioned was probably because that was very much NOT what she was executed for (unless my limited knowledge of medieval theology is missing when and where the church declared cross dressing heretical).
She was executed for heresy (hence why she was burned) because of her lack of knowledge about specific points of theology. Admittedly not wearing men's clothes was a condition of her "probation" (for want of a better term) following her 1st trial and recanting of her claims of divine visions (the validity of which is why she's tried again), but it's debated as to why she wore men's clothes in the first place.
Certainly there's an argument for it being because of her gender identity (which is somewhat undermined by her initial refusal to wear the men's clothes provided for her in the specific instance that was the justification for her 2nd trial) but there's also arguments for practicality and safety (in that this is a teenage girl travelling long distances often in limited company through a warzone with at least 3 armies (all of whom are abusing civilians) and all the dangers that presents).
Cross-dressing was considered blasphemous.
From the transcript of her trial:
It is sufficiently notorious and well-known that for some time past a woman calling herself Jeanne the Pucelle, leaving off the dress and clothing of the feminine sex, a thing contrary to divine law and abominable before God, and forbidden by all laws, wore clothing and armour such as is worn by men; [...] Asked whether her saying that she would take a woman's dress if they would let her go, was pleasing to God, she answered that if they let her go in a woman's dress, she would at once put on man's dress and do as Our Lord commanded her. She has said this before. And she would not for anything take the oath that she would not take up arms or wear male dress to do Our Lord's will. [...] As to the Thirteenth, accusing her of blasphemy [in saying that it was at God's command that she put on male clothing, 'violating canon law, to the scandal of her sex and womanly modesty, and to the perversion of all decent behaviour.']: She answered: I have blasphemed neither God nor His saints. And after it was explained to her that according to canon law and the Holy Scriptures the taking by women of man's dress and the taking by men of woman's dress is an abomination before God, they asked her whether she had taken the said dress by God's command, she said: You have been answered as to this before: and if you wish me to answer again, then grant me a delay, and I will answer you. Being asked whether she would take a woman's dress so that she might receive her Saviour at Easter, she answered that she would not leave off her [man's] dress either to receive her Saviour or for any other reason. She added that to receive her Saviour neither man's nor woman's dress made any difference; and It ought not to be refused her on account of this dress. [...] You have said that, by God's command, you have continually worn man's dress, wearing the short robe, doublet, and hose attached by points; that you have also worn your hair short, cut en rond above your ears, with nothing left that could show you to be a woman; and that on many occasions you received the Body of our Lord dressed in this fashion, although you have been frequently admonished to leave it off, which you have refused to do, saying that you would rather die than leave it off, save by God's command. And you said further that if you were still so dressed and with the king and those of his party, it would be one of the greatest blessings for the kingdom of France; and you have said that not for anything would you take an oath not to wear this dress or carry arms; and concerning all these matters you have said that you did well, and obediently to God's command. As for these points, the clerks say that you blaspheme God in His sacraments; that you transgress divine law, the Holy Scriptures and the canon law; you hold the Faith doubtfully and wrongly; you boast vainly; you are suspect of idolatry; and you condemn yourself in being unwilling to wear the customary clothing of your sex, and following the custom of the Gentiles and the heathen. [...]
From Clothes Make the Man: Female Crossdressing in Medieval Europe:
Regardless of the cause of the return to male dress, transvestism remains a primary reason for condemnation. During the rehabilitation hearings, witnesses to the event in Rouen were asked why she was charged with being a relapsed heretic after she had clearly stated her willingness to submit herself to the pope. Everyone of them cited the reversion to male dress as the reason. Pierre Cusquel stated this succinctly: “Populus dicebat quod nulla erat alia causa condemnationis suae, nisi resumptio habitus virilis.” [The people said there was no other cause for her condemnation, except the resumption of masculine clothing.] Even among the supporters of Jeanne’s rehabilitation one senses an uneasiness toward her cross dressing. For the most part, they overlooked her own explanation for transvestism when they defended it as a protective device or blamed her enemies for forcing her to put on men’s clothes after the abjuration. They shied away from extolling her transvestism but offered various excuses to legitimate it within the Christian tradition. For example, the rehabilitation proceedings include a defense for receiving the sacraments in male dress grounded in hagiographic precedence: [...] [It ought not to be judged heretical if she received the sacrament in this habit (male dress), since it had been taken up out of necessity for her duty and office, and it was worn for a good cause. Just as no one will fault blessed Marina, who was accused of a crime, if, continually in men’s clothes, she dwelt incognito in the monastery of monks, communicating in the sacraments with the monks. Similarly, concerning blessed Eugenia, who lived for a very long time and very chastely in men’s clothes.] Jeanne apparently never made such excuses during her trial, although they were attributed to her by later authors. In fact, she failed to use any of her supporters’ defenses for transvestism at her trial. She neglected to cite examples of biblical heroines and transvestite saints, although it is likely that she had heard of such precedents either from French encomiasts in their tributes to her or from her own religious upbringing. Instead, she persisted in the unprovable claim that God was the source of her transvestism. Perhaps she ignored biblical and hagiographic precedents because they were not her models. Unlike Jeanne, Judith and Esther used womanly charms to succeed, and although she also has been compared with female monks, her goal was not the imitation of meek men. The transvestite saints’ lives of self-effacement in the cloister had little in common with Jeanne’s military career. Even Camilla, Penthesilea, and Semiramis, the classical female warriors, whom Jeanne, with her limited education, may not even have known, offered no analogy to her divinely ordained transvestism. Jeanne was obviously not concerned with precedents; she emphasized the importance of her male dress without apology because it distinguished her, served as a source of strength, and, she maintained, represented God’s will.
I've made my case for Jeanne d'Arc as a part of both trans and women's histories in this post, but essentially the point is not that I think Joan identified as not-a-woman, it is that she crossdressed for the sake of crossdressing and found it personally meaningful to her, and her gender deviance was used as justification to kill her. It was the gender deviance that was a part of the heresy, particularly because she claimed it was commanded by God. She suffered as a result of transphobia and misogyny, even if that was not the only thing at play.
i find it interesting how people will shout "death before detransition" and then immediately say thats not what it means when one points out thats what jeanne darc chose
was inspired by this ask to make these
something something the irony of it being hard to find a depiction of jeanne being burned to death in men's clothing despite it literally being the law used to justify murdering her and the thing she explicitly refused to stop doing even if it killed her. the way the crossdressing saint isn't allowed to be depicted as anything but a beautiful pale-skinned feminine woman with long flowing hair. yet when she refused to stop wearing men's clothing she was compared to a dog returning to its own vomit.
Hate to piss on your bonfire, but the reason you probably found it difficult to find the image you mentioned was probably because that was very much NOT what she was executed for (unless my limited knowledge of medieval theology is missing when and where the church declared cross dressing heretical).
She was executed for heresy (hence why she was burned) because of her lack of knowledge about specific points of theology. Admittedly not wearing men's clothes was a condition of her "probation" (for want of a better term) following her 1st trial and recanting of her claims of divine visions (the validity of which is why she's tried again), but it's debated as to why she wore men's clothes in the first place.
Certainly there's an argument for it being because of her gender identity (which is somewhat undermined by her initial refusal to wear the men's clothes provided for her in the specific instance that was the justification for her 2nd trial) but there's also arguments for practicality and safety (in that this is a teenage girl travelling long distances often in limited company through a warzone with at least 3 armies (all of whom are abusing civilians) and all the dangers that presents).
Cross-dressing was considered blasphemous.
From the transcript of her trial:
It is sufficiently notorious and well-known that for some time past a woman calling herself Jeanne the Pucelle, leaving off the dress and clothing of the feminine sex, a thing contrary to divine law and abominable before God, and forbidden by all laws, wore clothing and armour such as is worn by men; [...] Asked whether her saying that she would take a woman's dress if they would let her go, was pleasing to God, she answered that if they let her go in a woman's dress, she would at once put on man's dress and do as Our Lord commanded her. She has said this before. And she would not for anything take the oath that she would not take up arms or wear male dress to do Our Lord's will. [...] As to the Thirteenth, accusing her of blasphemy [in saying that it was at God's command that she put on male clothing, 'violating canon law, to the scandal of her sex and womanly modesty, and to the perversion of all decent behaviour.']: She answered: I have blasphemed neither God nor His saints. And after it was explained to her that according to canon law and the Holy Scriptures the taking by women of man's dress and the taking by men of woman's dress is an abomination before God, they asked her whether she had taken the said dress by God's command, she said: You have been answered as to this before: and if you wish me to answer again, then grant me a delay, and I will answer you. Being asked whether she would take a woman's dress so that she might receive her Saviour at Easter, she answered that she would not leave off her [man's] dress either to receive her Saviour or for any other reason. She added that to receive her Saviour neither man's nor woman's dress made any difference; and It ought not to be refused her on account of this dress. [...] You have said that, by God's command, you have continually worn man's dress, wearing the short robe, doublet, and hose attached by points; that you have also worn your hair short, cut en rond above your ears, with nothing left that could show you to be a woman; and that on many occasions you received the Body of our Lord dressed in this fashion, although you have been frequently admonished to leave it off, which you have refused to do, saying that you would rather die than leave it off, save by God's command. And you said further that if you were still so dressed and with the king and those of his party, it would be one of the greatest blessings for the kingdom of France; and you have said that not for anything would you take an oath not to wear this dress or carry arms; and concerning all these matters you have said that you did well, and obediently to God's command. As for these points, the clerks say that you blaspheme God in His sacraments; that you transgress divine law, the Holy Scriptures and the canon law; you hold the Faith doubtfully and wrongly; you boast vainly; you are suspect of idolatry; and you condemn yourself in being unwilling to wear the customary clothing of your sex, and following the custom of the Gentiles and the heathen. [...]
From Clothes Make the Man: Female Crossdressing in Medieval Europe:
Regardless of the cause of the return to male dress, transvestism remains a primary reason for condemnation. During the rehabilitation hearings, witnesses to the event in Rouen were asked why she was charged with being a relapsed heretic after she had clearly stated her willingness to submit herself to the pope. Everyone of them cited the reversion to male dress as the reason. Pierre Cusquel stated this succinctly: “Populus dicebat quod nulla erat alia causa condemnationis suae, nisi resumptio habitus virilis.” [The people said there was no other cause for her condemnation, except the resumption of masculine clothing.] Even among the supporters of Jeanne’s rehabilitation one senses an uneasiness toward her cross dressing. For the most part, they overlooked her own explanation for transvestism when they defended it as a protective device or blamed her enemies for forcing her to put on men’s clothes after the abjuration. They shied away from extolling her transvestism but offered various excuses to legitimate it within the Christian tradition. For example, the rehabilitation proceedings include a defense for receiving the sacraments in male dress grounded in hagiographic precedence: [...] [It ought not to be judged heretical if she received the sacrament in this habit (male dress), since it had been taken up out of necessity for her duty and office, and it was worn for a good cause. Just as no one will fault blessed Marina, who was accused of a crime, if, continually in men’s clothes, she dwelt incognito in the monastery of monks, communicating in the sacraments with the monks. Similarly, concerning blessed Eugenia, who lived for a very long time and very chastely in men’s clothes.] Jeanne apparently never made such excuses during her trial, although they were attributed to her by later authors. In fact, she failed to use any of her supporters’ defenses for transvestism at her trial. She neglected to cite examples of biblical heroines and transvestite saints, although it is likely that she had heard of such precedents either from French encomiasts in their tributes to her or from her own religious upbringing. Instead, she persisted in the unprovable claim that God was the source of her transvestism. Perhaps she ignored biblical and hagiographic precedents because they were not her models. Unlike Jeanne, Judith and Esther used womanly charms to succeed, and although she also has been compared with female monks, her goal was not the imitation of meek men. The transvestite saints’ lives of self-effacement in the cloister had little in common with Jeanne’s military career. Even Camilla, Penthesilea, and Semiramis, the classical female warriors, whom Jeanne, with her limited education, may not even have known, offered no analogy to her divinely ordained transvestism. Jeanne was obviously not concerned with precedents; she emphasized the importance of her male dress without apology because it distinguished her, served as a source of strength, and, she maintained, represented God’s will.
I've made my case for Jeanne d'Arc as a part of both trans and women's histories in this post, but essentially the point is not that I think Joan identified as not-a-woman, it is that she crossdressed for the sake of crossdressing and found it personally meaningful to her, and her gender deviance was used as justification to kill her. It was the gender deviance that was a part of the heresy, particularly because she claimed it was commanded by God. She suffered as a result of transphobia and misogyny, even if that was not the only thing at play.
