My pronouns are John/Jacob/Jingleheimer Schmidt



MedievalPOC is scamming you, here’s how and why: 

  1. For all that MedievalPOC railed against how “awful” periodization in this reblog, what they mostly did was prove they have ABSOLUTELY NO UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT PERIODIZATION IS OR HOW IT WORKS. 

    Which is okay! Not everyone does. But if you’re a history blog, trying to pass off Italian Baroque Art from the 1670’s as from the Georgian period is flat out wrong on every humanly possible level. How do I know it’s not Georgian, but Italian Baroque? Well, MPOC actually directly linked folks back to the original works and then bet NO ONE would check their facts

    Talk about incriminating receipts, right? It’s a mistake anyone could make….except this is a history blog, and it’s not an easy mistake to make when you’re in the wrong CENTURY. The last photo is my accurate to period examples that i found quickly.  

    Periodization, by the way:  an act or instance of dividing a subject into historical eras for purposes of analysis and study. Periods are “named blocks of time” that can be geographically specific. They are often named for major historical events, famous people, or dates. Periods are useful for analyzing change, continuity, or advances over time. Examples: Meiji Japan, the Renaissance, the gilded age, the long 19th century, the 60’s.  

  2. So MPOC hates historiography because its fluid/changing, different from art history in many ways, and not always precise — and therefore wrong. Then proceeds to prove their point by suggesting that the United States experienced the Victorian Era. 

    Which, granted, the US did experience a multitude of influences from the “victorian era” but….it’s also no longer a part of the British empire in the 19th century. 
  3. MPOC is asking people to pay them…..to break the law and/or do things that you can literally do yourself, for free or are already available for a price. IE: selling art prints of POC in art owned by different resources (museums, galleries, private owners, etc) is actually really illegal and against copyright. It’s technically illegal to put these images online without permissions anyways, but you don’t make a profit off of selling the art that isn’t owned by you when you do it. Interested in prints? Well you can either print off the image yourself for free,  or buy them from the actual museums and galleries themselves, furthering the support of the actual items! When you buy prints or postcards of art DIRECTLY from museums, you are funding museums. The money they get from giftshops is actually VERY IMPORTANT because museums and databases like the ones MPOC use are NON-PROFIT organizations AND this money will go to funding the museum, be that for outreach to children, conserving the art, paying their staff, publishing free educational materials, etc. It is an absolutely vital source of income for museums that serve their communities and want to keep their art accessible. 

    There are a few collections which are free for reproduction commercially, like the National Gallery of Art but this isn’t the norm across the board. Besides that? Well I realize buying a $95 art book may be out of the range for some people’s pockets (TRUST ME: having been someone required to buy a lot of these textbooks which are pricey because of the vast amount of copyright fees paid to publish them), there are cheaper or used similar books on amazon AND several museums and universities have published some of their older books online for FREE. Which includes The Met. Why are you going to pay someone else to read books for you when they don’t even give you the facts right?? 
  4. They want $1,200 a month to make lesson plans and curricula about art and art history but can’t even differentiate between two separate countries in two different time periods. This isn’t “one mistake” I found. This is systematically getting things wrong, including the time they claimed that Queen Urraca of Spain might possibly be Muslim — despite the fact that Queen Urraca of Spain spent her career helping and advocating the Reconquista - AKA the murder of Muslim people in Spain. Uhhhh…

    Which of course: These lesson plans? Stuff like this already exists! By (surprise) Museum educators whose JOB it is full time to make this stuff. It’s almost like this stuff is ALREADY free online [The Met, The Getty, Asian Art Museum… pretty much any major museum on the planet….] AND THIS STUFF IS AVAILABLE AND READY TO BE USED. A LOT OF IT IS FREE. How do I know this magical stuff??? because (and I’m guessing here) UNLIKE MPOC I have actually taken a class on museum education. 
  5. MPOC is offering to write a book. a really real published book. SPOILER ALERT: in the art history world, you GENERALLY have a PhD before you publish a book. Why? Because the PhD certifies you as an expert in the thing you study and it is an academic topic. No university/academic publisher alive would risk this. Is it maybe an ivory tower elitist thing? Hell yeah it is. Would any editor in their right mind publish a book as riddled with basic factual errors as much as the MPOC blog? Hell no they would not. What about those publishers who publish pseudo-historical books like “PS ‘everything was made by aliens’” ? Well unless they want their asses sued to hell and back over copyrights, they probably won’t be able to foot the necessary bills for these images. Independent publishing doesn’t make any of it LESS illegal. They want to cover the license costs with crowd funding???  


    According to Linda Downs, executive director of the College Art Association, image permissions and licensing costs for a 200-page art-history book average $7,000 to $10,000. Authors usually have to cover those costs themselves. Scholars in disciplines that aren’t so visual might jump at the chance to publish in both print and online formats, Ms. Downs told me in an e-mail. But “art historians will choose one or the other” because they might get hit with two sets of permissions fees and other restrictions. Good luck with that. In order to recoup those kinds of costs the books will NOT be cheap. 
  6. MPOC has been called out by several NDN bloggers regarding the fact that they have been caught lying about their Native/POC heritage. Although the days of stupid_free and fandom_wank have long past, now we have other ways to collect receipts and here AND ALSO HERE REALLY IMPORTANT and know that they are white, white, white — and lied about who they were. Like here’s a hint there are NO Lakota reservations in AZ. If you really miss livejournal, however, you can see the call out on SF_DRAMAThe internet will never forget a white girl co-opting POC to garner cash.
  7. They also have ZERO UNDERSTANDING of how to treat Jewish people in Europe in history. Which is called out here better than I ever can or could because I am not Jewish. They also fumble with the Roma (which they claim to be) and that + the Judaism issue is also called out here
  8. Don’t send this person harassment but don’t give them money holy shit y’all you are being scammed. SCAMMED. Do not PAY people to feed you half-assed poor researched bullshit that is available free online. 

- a poc who is tired of the “best diversity in history” blog being wrong about pretty much everything 

Plus it’s run by girljanitor who was outed as a Pretendian like months ago.

(via plansfornigel)


Posters from 1989 regarding pro-life / pro-choice by Barbara Kruger

I can’t understand why this is STILL an issue 

(via veruca-assault)

“Most women in the modern Western world have no space of our own in the home—no den, basement workshop, garage, outside domain, or special chair in the living room. Though the kitchen and bedroom often are thought of as “her” rooms, they are hers only as spaces in which she is expected to provide services to and for her man. Private space—space in which she can just be, space where she does not have to justify her presence by being engaged in work—is nonexistent unless she actively creates and maintains it.”


"Loving to Survive" Graham (via kingcobracommander)

and its interesting that when watching tv or reading things the “man cave” always gets brought up as a half joke but really more serious thing that every man “needs” but then when women have craft rooms or other similar things related to their own interest it is always the butt of a joke (haha silly wimminz wanting space of their own)


We’re looking for our next house right now and we are looking for one with enough space that I can have a craft room. That’s non negotiable, I craft a lot and it’s good for my mental health but mostly it’s important to me and therefore it’s important to my boyfriend too.

When I tell people that there is a LOT of pushback. They act like we are being extravagant (I’m aware we are very privileged to be able to afford this but this is fro. People with three cars and five tvs) or say thing like ‘where will [boyfriend] go?!’

Oh I dunno, LITERALLY ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WHOLE HOUSE, which is also his? Where will he watch tv? Probably the lounge room. You know. Where the tv is.

Or they say ‘will he at least get a shed??’ No, since he hates gardening. Probably I will get a shed.

It makes me so mad, but I hadn’t really articulated why until this post.

(via vaspider)

(via veruca-assault)


I wish I could go the rest of my life without seeing or hearing the word “monosexual” again.

(via womanontheedgeoftyne)


something that really bothers me - women identifying as nonbinary because they don’t subscribe to the oppressive beauty standards placed upon them by patriarchy. a great deal of us don’t want to subscribe to them and identify their existence as what it is—misogyny—but trying to “identify” our way out of “woman” does not erase the oppression. it upholds the damage done to young girls by normalizing these standards as inherent to “cis women”.

(via lesbianwarfare)

From the late 1990s, my attention, as a feminist sociologist, kept being drawn to media images, which were intended to provoke some, imagined group of (always humourless) feminists. These images appeared, in a celebratory fashion, to reverse the clock, turning it back to some earlier prefeminist moment, while at the same time doing so in a rather tongue-in-cheek kind of way. The prevailing use of irony seemed to exonerate the culprits from the crime of offending against what was caricatured as a kind of extreme, and usually man-hating feminism, while at the same time acknowledging that other, more acceptable, forms of feminism, had by now entered into the realms of common sense and were broadly acceptable. The famous ‘Hello Boys’ Wonderbra billboard advertisement was the most obvious example.

The rhetoric of this image proposed the deviant pleasure of being ‘politically incorrect’ with force and energy. The old feminist was addressed implicitly, as a woman who sought to limit the pleasures of the ‘rest of us’. Thank goodness, the image seemed to suggest, we can now, once again, enjoy looking at the bodies of beautiful women with impunity. So skilful with the use of postmodern irony was the image, that it also sought to produce a kind of generational divide, the younger female viewer is not made angry, unlike her older counterpart. She appreciates the multiple layers of meaning and she gets the joke. Since then this new kind of sophisticated anti-feminism has become a recurring feature across the landscape of both popular and also political culture. Its distinctive feature is that it upholds the principles of gender equality, while denigrating the figure of the feminist. From the gentle upbraiding of the feminist in Bridget Jones’s Diary, to the rise of lapdancing clubs, to the sexist-in-inverted-comma jokes of Ricky Gervais, Russell Brand, and Jonathan Ross, to hen parties, to proliferation of ‘lads mags’, to the sexualisation of small girls through the rise of fashion and beauty brands targeted at the under 5s, to the retro-styled garden barbeque event like that staged during the Obama visit to the UK in summer 2011, which had in the foreground the wives dressed for the part, and hence traditionally ‘wifely’, to the spectacular and unapologetic hate speech of Berlusconi, who nevertheless also claims to support the careers and ambitions of young glamorous women, while showering older women who challenge him with torrents of verbal abuse, we see something socially significant solidify under the surface of contemporary cultural life.

One Reason Women Fare Worse in Negotiations? People Lie to Them.

(Source: yoursocialconstructsareshowing, via plansfornigel)




I’ve thought about writing something out about this for a while now. 

I am constantly seeing pro-kink people defending BDSM with remarks such as - ”How is BDSM misogynistic when there are submissive men and dominant women?”

As someone who was deeply involved in the BDSM community, and who was more specifically, a domme who enacted that domination out solely on men, this is one of the most frustrating defences of BDSM.

First, let me state that just because, in any situation involving misogyny or oppression of any kind, there are instances that seem to go against the grain doesn’t make that a good argument. It also doesn’t make it free of the same critique. 

Read More

(via hedonisticparadise)


Me being gender critical doesn’t erase your identity and isn’t a call for trans people to be killed. Women are allowed to structurally analyize social theory, regardless of if you agree with them or not. If you can’t tell the difference between political analysis, and a call for a mass extermination, then you probably shouldn’t be given your own political platform.  

(via respexual)

Anonymous said: why are escorts needed in abortion clinics?


Because pro-lifers have a nasty habit of trying to block women from entering the doors, either by bullying them with revolting and misleading photographs, trying to emotionally coerce them, harassing them and calling them baby-killers, or trying to lead them to “crisis pregnancy centres” that are actually right-wing Christian centres.

There’s also the little-mentioned tendency of pro-life groups to become violent and shoot abortion doctors, so escorts can and do serve as the first line of defence.