#historical gay terms

[goldenstarprincesses]

Out: Puritan and Quaker America

In: America lived with the Shakers because they saw him as just another sad little abandoned orphan and with their interpretation of God leaning more mystical they weren't freaked out by him not aging normally

#but honestly the Shakers are (where) a super interesting group of people #progressive in terms of gender and racial equality+ had a work ethic that was like yeah you had to work but you should also make art #and invent things to make your like and the life of others easier #and other religious groups HATED them for that like it was viewed as being super whacky and unchristian #from a academic perspective I have to wonder how many Shakers were gay/lesbian/asexual+ and they just didnt have a term for not wanting #heterosexual marriage in early 1700s England so they just sorta did their best to create their own community in the environment #they already had available to them #I also really like this for Nyo America due to how I think it would have impacted her mentality about being a leader #hws america #aph america #nyo america #hetalia america #hetalia #historical hetalia #alfred f jones #amelia jones

[kazz-brekker]

after rereading dark rise i am now pondering the similarities between james immediately being cast out by the stewards when they realized he was a reborn despite the fact that he had no control over who his past self was versus strict religious communities that believe being gay is a sin and someone is inherently bad because of their sexuality even though they're just born that way and it's a normal part of a person

#i feel like this is on purpose??? #at least cs pacat has stated dark rise is about adding queerness into the traditional hero's narrative #and questioning ideas of good and evil in those stories #pie says stuff #pie reads #dark rise #cs pacat #books #actually i would like to know a bit more about the steward's thoughts on sexuality #they seem chill with people of various genders and races being stewards #but then james's dad called him a kind of bad historical term for gay people?? #that may have been about specifically having been the dark king's lover tho

[thecaduceusclay]

Hey if I made a little informative post about like the gay culture the stranger things kids would be exposed to and stuff in the 80s (like focused on helping out fanfic writers and stuff) would anyone be interested?

#stranger things #byler #steveddie #ronance #figured id tag the most common gay ships i know for that fandom im not super involved so idk #just like if anyone would want some info compiled on like terms used and major events #i took a college course that focused on the AIDS crisis for like a third of the semester so i have some pretty good info already #specifically i think it might be relevant like when ACT UP was doing really newsworthy stuff cause that might impact what ppl know #like theres zero chance of a person not knowing gay ppl exist after the die in at the CDC was major news #also like basics like what flags existed what terms existed (ie the term transgender wasnt used really) #not that ppl have to be historically accurate just for ppl who wanna

[pechebeche]

listen i dont have a strong opinion on "bisexual lesbians" or whatever either way outside of the term's historical context. but yall CANNOT be on this website calling men girlfailures or lady dads or whatever and also insist on a strictly regimented system of sexuality. either you believe in the fluidity of labels regarding sexuality and gender or you dont.

Unless You Are Just Using These Terms To Associate Any Male With Mild Femininity As "Less Men" Then Other Men. but surely none of you would have bad opinions on the internet

#discourse #blah blah historical precedent the term 'lesbian' used to be used the way we use 'sapphic' now and the lack of a prescient history of #bisexuality independent of its classification as Type Of Homosexuality TM (in as many words) can be a huge source of derision against bi/pa #ppl and if they want to associate themselves with the historical movements of lesbian/gay history (which have ALWAYS included bi ppl but we #just folded them in together without acknowledging it) then that is just as open for them to be part of as anyone else #and also terminology around queerness is constantly evolving and also who cares. this is not why straight people hate us #and also if i have to put up around the dysphoria of seeing men get called 'babygirl' all the time you can handle someone using words weird #this is not a critique of those jokes abt men by the way. yall do you. just consider your double standards

[arielmagicesi]

I'm reading a biography of Emily Dickinson, and I picked this specific biography because my host teacher from student observations recommended it, but a previous person who checked it out of the library covered nearly every page in scathing penciled remarks criticizing the author for details of his Dickinson research and it's a weird experience to read as someone who's largely familiar with her work and not her life. Also this is one of those "lol can you imagine being an ahistorical loser who thought Emily was attracted to women? Lesbians weren't invented yet, you silly rumor-believers" books which is slightly exhausting to deal with every time Emily does something that seems kinda gay, which is like every 10 minutes of her life from what I can glean so far. That said, I like getting an immense amount of detail about Dickinson's world and the historical context of transcendentalist-era New England, and I also don't want to DNF this book, and I'm insane and thus convinced that reading every book that a more established teacher recommends will mystically help me be a good teacher and not a clueless dumbass. So here we are

#also I'm using 'lesbians' as a catchall term. idk how Emily would identify if she were exposed to today's identity discourse lol #the biography is 'my wars are laid away in books' by alfred habegger #he doesn't like. explicitly say 'emily dickinson was super heterosexual' or whatever #but there's a vague film of condescension towards the notion of her quote-unquote 'supposed lesbianism' #and it's like. ok you do not have to be a dick about it #I'm all about not jumping to conclusions and being aware of historical contexts but first of all don't be a dick about it #and second of all like... come on you know why people think she's gay. you read the letters. come on dude #written by me #emily dickinson

[justletmeon12]

"The Homosexuality of Men and Women"

Reading Magus Hirschfeld's work is wild because one paragraph will be "Bisexuals exist, you can be as masc or femme as you want without it meaning anything about your sexual orientation, not being attracted to a gender doesn't mean you hate them, and people should be allowed to dress however they want for their mental health," and then the next will be "And now I will list all the traits I believe are characteristic of gay men in order of how much they remind me of women and also this trans man is just a delusional lesbian."

#Magnus Hirschfeld #The Homosexuality of Men and Women #gay #lesbian #bisexual #bisexuality #asexuality #sexology #historical sex literature is weird #especially when written by straight people #gods bless him - he's trying #he's still better at this than 90% of the Right today #and if we're honest a good 85% of psychiatrists #he uses the term “delusion” a lot about trans issues exclusively #I wrote this post before learning he was gay #the trans stuff is still accurate though

[unholyplumpprincess]

Gags bc someone tried following me who had this whole thing abt how butch/femme are terms only for lesbians and then had a post right after calling queer a slur FOLLOWED BY ANOTHER POST saying ppl needed to read their history and educate themselves

Like,,,my good bitch,,,do u want a mirror,,,

#princess talks #It is absolutely okay to not wanna use queer for urself but anything is a slur if u say it with enough oomph #also butch/femme historically include all sapphics and even gay men used to use the terms like #???? #i am a plethora of knowledge and rage but i just block and move on #but my biggest kicker is i am loudly bisexual and femme like? #gestures loudly #why would u wanna follow me??? #man AND theyre an aphobe #J E E Z #quadruple whammy huh #we dont support exclusionists here #I feel like that one meme of that feral ass person snapping wood in half with their teeth #Listen I just block and move on but if u try following me im gONNA LOOK AT UR BLOG

[13thsinnr]

joshua david king (cream uni’s va) has been saying on twitter how fujoshi culture is damaging to gay men and that the genre of BL as a whole is largely harmful to gay men and people are going off on him and it’s so so tiring

#it’s true that fujoshi historically meant smth else and that’s fair. but you are calling them racist for saying modern fujo culture is - #damaging instead of calling out the way white girls started using the term to sexualize gay men? why are you so weird #like people do not realize THAT is the problem with it. we’re not tryna attack the culture were just saying it’s really weird and makes us #uncomfortable and you can’t even respect a fucking line in the sand #people on twitter don’t talk over mlms challenge (IMPOSSIBLE) #‘there are bigger problems than your feelings’ that is word for word transphobic rhetoric #i don’t know how y’all do it

[miraculouslumination]

"Just look at the way bisexuality has been treated and tell me it hasn't affected the way people look at it now"

"Oh right!! True! Like how bisexual people have been slandered for having "straight passing privilege" if they are in a m/f relationship! Or how so many people, queer or not, have made up a bunch of lies about bisexuality! Like how (typically separatist/radfem) lesbians have said that bi women taint safe spaces for queer women, especially if they have a boyfriend. Or when bisexuals have actually been completely forced out of queer wlw spaces because they also love men. Or how some people, queer or not, don't want to "risk" being in a relationship with a bi person, because their identity apparently makes them somehow more likely to cheat? Or the idea that bi people are all just sex crazy degens? Or how people have said that bisexuality are just straight people to be special/infiltrate the community. And/or also just gays/lesbians with heavily internalized homophobia/heteronormativity/""comp het"". Or how bi people have constantly been erased and instead labeled as just "gay" or "lesbian", both in real life and also when a fictional character is bi. Or the idea that bi people will eventually "pick a side" and stop trying to be special. Or how bi people are expected to "make up" for their supposed "lack of queerness" if they're in a relationship that isn't strictly m/m or f/f. Or how trans bi people face a lot of unique problems, even in the bi community itself. Or how so many people of all identities, including other bis, have tried to reduce bi down to one very simple and close-minded definition. Or how-"

"What? No. I meant how pansexuality is CLEARLY the root of ALL biphobia and was fully and completely born from that biphobia. I don't know what the fuck you're talking about."

"....what."

#Jean rambles #Biphobia #Panphobia #This is literally how some people on this website are like #Just completely ignoring all the biphobic slander and bullshit that straight gay lesbian and so many non-pan queer groups have said #Which is basically just ignoring queer history #I don't know how to tell you this but historically bi has gotten so much shit from literally the whole alphabet and then some #It didn't start and surely has not ended with pansexuality omnisexualitu or polysexuality #Nor with people wanting to make the umbrella term ''mspec'' more wide spread and accepted #When I had a terf in my notes saying that liking dick gives you privilege #Which is pure biphobic crap #I bet you that she wasn't pan or omni or p(o)ly or anything like that #So stop acting like biphobia has only ever come from pan people #Because it fucking hasn't

[kyuala]

oh my god i could probably talk abt this forever and i literally wont shut up about it until the world cup rolls around but do u guys wanna know abt the covert coup they tried to stage 2day

#ok so basically bols*naro n his allies were already fearing his loss right. bc they know lula is a popular leftist leader here #little bit of background lula rose to high ranking political office through populism. that means his main focus when in power r the masses #lower classes and socially oppressed groups like black ppl women the Gays™ etc #he was the first ever president to rly look at our country's northeast region and do something for them #historically the northeast is the poorest most discriminated against region. poverty is a great concern there #they annually suffer bc of droughts and they're the part of the country nearly the whole rest is xenophobic towards #i'd say rlly only the north region isnt so xenophobic towards them bc theyre almostttt there but #the south and southeast are the worst. im talking most whitened populations who descend from europeans n think they're better #just bc they're the richer regions too. the midwest comes close too in terms of xenophobia but literally who cares abt them. anyways #bc of this history the northeast region has a history of preferring left-wing leaders esp from pt - lula's party #in the 1st round of elections earlier this month lula won the majority of votes in that region - as expected. bols*naro spectacularly lost #after that he went on to publicly state during a live stream - yes that is how our now soon-to-be FORMER president communicated with us - #that the only reason lula won there is bc the illiteracy rates were higher. basically implying they didnt vote for him bc theyre uneducated #which is v obviously a lie. 7 out of 10 perfect scores in enem - our national highschool exams - came from that region so. yea theyre NOT #uneducated they just never bought into bols*naro's bullshit like the rest of the country did. and he knew that #so fast forward to today. free public transportation on election days is a right to every brazilian citizen #a lot of northeastern people depend on buses to get to the polling places. theyre most notably the region where this happens the most #the chief of the federal highway police is a known public supporter of blsnr. the frp announced they'd be having several traffic blitzes #during election day - that's illegal. keeping ppl from voting or making their journey 2 polling places more difficult is an electoral crime #the supreme electoral court ruled against this. the frp chief then released a statement basically saying yea idc i'll still do this #and 2day they did. several traffic blitzes were set up across the country but guess who took the bigger hit? northeastern voters #roughly HALF of the operations were set up in that region alone - the other half was p evenly distributed between the remaining 4 REGIONS #the northeast suffered roughly 5x more than other regions in voter suppression bc of this. n we already know why #yall know whats the funniest part of this? he still lost 💀 #so yea thats basically how blsnr n his lackeys tried 2 overthrow a democratic decision b4 it was even made so they wouldnt lose their power #n when i say that was an illegal move i mean that department of the federal police literally never cared abt that before #n blsnr had already tried to suspend free fare across the country - to keep poor people from voting - during the 1st AND 2nd rounds #he failed so his frp supporters tried to step in. they were legally and directly prohibited from doing so and still went ahead w it #also several northeastern voters posted videos online of federal agents keeping the buses from circulating #and innumerous accounts of them trying to coerce and constrain voters into revealing their voting intentions - another crime

[pansyfemme]

genuinly i support anyones ideas of what a femme/fem is bc it means different things to everyone but. the only tiktoker who insisted that femme as an identity only exists as a counterpoint to a butch in a relationship because they go by 'historical definintions' and then in the same breath said that bi women cant identify as butch/femme because the communities are so different. pick one history to follow please

#history! #turning off rbs bc like. i hate it when my posts I don't mean to spread when I'm just venting #but like. for me. i can acknowledge that aligning with the original definition of a term is a way of accepting queer history #but i can also accept that those same terms have evolved and in pretty much every decade from its coining femme has had a different #definition. the femme definintion i feel closest to was how it was used by gay men in the 80s/90s to reclaim the idea of being a visibly #queer man as not a weakness or something to be ashamed of and to fight against masc4masc only gay cultures. #that's also a historical defnition with a significant history. #i acknowledge that not everyone might consider me a femme in their definition and feeling of the term. #but i know how it works for me and how it was used before I was even born #people often just say 'thats history!' and fail to acknowledge any growth or change in language since the coining of the word #people still yell about how queer is historically a slur and ignore that its also historically an empowering statement and a name of a #movement. faggot is a degrading slur. it's also an identity that people have used for a long time at this point. those statements can co #exist. what doesnt make sense is speaking for people as a whole and failing to understand that people have different ways of experiencing #queerness. the first definition isnt the one everyone uses and neither is the current. you can't just say and run away when #you're blatently leaving out facts that are also historical. language changes all of the time. its changing right this second. we don't #have to abandon the old meanings of worlds but also we need to consider the cultural impact and how those meanings have changed and accept #that some people will always be queer in a way you don't like and you can't really change that.

[cookinguptales]

So I’ve been enjoying the Disney vs. DeSantis memes as much as anyone, but like. I do feel like a lot of people who had normal childhoods are missing some context to all this.

I was raised in the Bible Belt in a fairly fundie environment. My parents were reasonably cool about some things, compared to the rest of my family, but they certainly had their issues. But they did let me watch Disney movies, which turned out to be a point of major contention between them and my other relatives.

See, I think some people think this weird fight between Disney and fundies is new. It is very not new. I know that Disney’s attempts at inclusion in their media have been the source of a lot of mockery, but what a lot of people don’t understand is that as far as actual company policy goes, Disney has actually been an industry leader for queer rights. They’ve had policies assuring equal healthcare and partner benefits for queer employees since the early 90s.

I’m not sure how many people reading this right now remember the early 90s, but that was very much not industry standard. It was a big deal when Disney announced that non-married queer partners would be getting the same benefits as the married heterosexual ones.

Like — it went further than just saying that any unmarried partners would be eligible for spousal benefits. It straight-up said that non-same-sex partners would still need to be married to receive spousal benefits, but because same-sex partners couldn’t do that, proof that they lived together as an established couple would be enough.

In other words, it put long-term same-sex partners on a higher level than opposite-sex partners who just weren’t married yet. It put them on the exact same level as heterosexual married partners.

They weren’t the first company ever to do this, but they were super early. And they were certainly the first mainstream “family-friendly” company to do it.

Conservatives lost their damn minds.

Protests, boycotts, sermons, the whole nine yards. I can’t tell you how many books about the evils of Disney my grandmother tried to get my parents to read when I was a kid.

When we later moved to Florida, I realized just how many queer people work at Disney — because historically speaking, it’s been a company that has guaranteed them safety, non-discrimination, and equal rights. That’s when I became aware of their unofficial “Gay Days” and how Christians would show up from all over the country to protest them every year. Apparently my grandmother had been upset about these days for years, but my parents had just kind of ignored her.

Out of curiosity, I ended up reading one of the books my grandmother kept leaving at our house. And friends — it’s amazing how similar that (terrible, poorly written) rhetoric was to what people are saying these days. Disney hires gay pedophiles who want to abuse your children. Disney is trying to normalize Satanism in our beautiful, Christian America. 

Just tons of conspiracy theories in there that ranged from “a few bad things happened that weren’t actually Disney’s fault, but they did happen” to “Pocahontas is an evil movie, not because it distorts history and misrepresents indigenous life, but because it might teach children respect for nature. Which, as we all know, would cause them all to become Wiccans who believe in climate change.”

Like — please, take it from someone who knows. This weird fight between fundies and Disney is not new. This is not Disney’s first (gay) rodeo. These people have always believed that Disney is full of evil gays who are trying to groom and sexually abuse children.

The main difference now is that these beliefs are becoming mainstream. It’s not just conservative pastors who are talking about this. It’s not just church groups showing up to boycott Gay Day. Disney is starting to (reluctantly) say the quiet part out loud, and so are the Republicans. Disney is publicly supporting queer rights and announcing company-supported queer events and the Republican Party is publicly calling them pedophiles and enacting politically driven revenge.

This is important, because while this fight has always been important in the history of queer rights, it is now being magnified. The precedent that a fight like this could set is staggering. For better or for worse, we live in a corporation-driven country. I don’t like it any more than you do, and I’m not about to defend most of Disney’s business practices. But we do live in a nation where rights are largely tied to corporate approval, and the fact that we might be entering an age where even the most powerful corporations in the country are being banned from speaking out in favor of rights for marginalized people… that’s genuinely scary.

Like… I’ll just ask you this. Where do you think we’d be now, in 2023, if Disney had been prevented from promising its employees equal benefits in 1994? That was almost thirty years ago, and look how far things have come. When I looked up news articles for this post from that era, even then journalists, activists, and fundie church leaders were all talking about how a company of Disney’s prominence throwing their weight behind this movement could lead to the normalization of equal protections in this country.

The idea of it scared and thrilled people in equal parts even then. It still scares and thrills them now.

I keep seeing people say “I need them both to lose!” and I get it, I do. Disney has for sure done a lot of shit over the years. But I am begging you as a queer exvangelical to understand that no. You need Disney to win. You need Disney to wipe the fucking floor with these people.

Right now, this isn’t just a fight between a giant corporation and Ron DeSantis. This is a fight about the right of corporations to support marginalized groups. It’s a fight that ensures that companies like Disney still can offer benefits that a discriminatory government does not provide. It ensures that businesses much smaller than Disney can support activism.

Hell, it ensures that you can support activism.

The fight between weird Christian conspiracy theorists and Disney is not new, because the fight to prevent any tiny victory for marginalized groups is not new. The fight against the normalization of othered groups is not new.

That’s what they’re most afraid of. That each incremental victory will start to make marginalized groups feel safer, that each incremental victory will start to turn the tide of public opinion, that each incremental victory will eventually lead to sweeping law reform.

They’re afraid that they won’t be able to legally discriminate against us anymore.

So guys! Please. This fight, while hilarious, is also so fucking important. I am begging you to understand how old this fight is. These people always play the long game. They did it with Roe and they’re doing it with Disney.

We have! To keep! Pushing back!

#disney #ron desantis #gay rights #lgbt #queer #lgbt history #queer history #homophobia #florida #us politics #religious fundamentalism #christianity #long post #god that should cover all the pertinent tags and content warnings phew

[genderqueerdykes]

fun fact of the day: anyone who tells you that "femme" and "butch" can only be used by lesbians took the terf pills- white cis lesbian separationists (terfs) are the ones behind the idea that only lesbians can use butch and femme when many lesbians of color have their own terms for masc and fem lesbians. this is also an effort to erase the history the terms butch and femme have had in including trans and gnc people, drag performers, bears, masc and fem gays into their preferred gender expression and community spaces. it's a historically inaccurate argument. have a good day!

#butch #femme #our writing

[omgthatdress]

The Importance of Studying Queerness in Context.

When studying queer history, one always has to keep in mind two seemingly contradictory things: firstly, that queerness and queer people have always existed, but at the same time, that queerness and queer identities have not always existed the way they exist today.

Modern queer terms and identities did not exist to queer people in the past. They would not have thought of themselves as "gay" or "trans" or even "queer." While these modern terms may seem to fit certain historic individuals, these individuals would not have thought of themselves as such, and it would not be a part of their lived experience. To apply the modern identities of queerness to history is to erase the lives and experiences of queer people in history, and care must always be taken to understand queer history within the context of its time.

When looking at queer history online, there is a *lot* of misinformation and misidentification out there simply because people are eager to apply modern queerness to history, often in places where it doesn't belong.

A lot of old photos get misidentified as gay because they show two people of the same sex showing some level of physical affection towards each other. Okay, I'll admit that the open-mouth kissing photobooth pictures are probably actually gay, but an old picture of two men or two women holding hands or with their arms around each other, or even kissing on the cheek, were common shows of platonic affection.

I hate to break everyone's gay little hearts, but without explicit documentation saying so, assuming that these couples are all gay is putting modern queer identity in places where it simply didn't exist. The women in the final picture are sisters. The "not married" boys are bachelors interested in marrying women.

In the silent film Wings, the emotional climax of the film comes in the form of a kiss exchanged between the characters played by Jack Powell and David Armstrong. It often gets attributed as the first gay kiss in cinema history, even on the fucking YouTube clip I found:

Except it isn't gay. The two men spend the whole film fighting over who gets to be Clara Bow's boyfriend. When Richard Arlen's character is fatally wounded, his dear friend rushes to his side and kisses him goodbye, because in the 1920s, that was considered the ultimate show of friendship. The movie ends with Jack Powell falling in love with Clara Bow.

Similarly, a kiss shared between Lillian and Dorothy Gish in the 1921 movie Orphans of the Storm often gets attributed as being queer, but it wasn't.

They were sisters playing sisters. None of this was considered unusual.

Pooh-poohing on all of these images that so many people on the internet breathlessly and joyously laud as proud gay history isn't fun. It makes me feel like I'm fucking Ben Shapiro. But if misinformation is allowed to flourish, it allows people like Ben Shapiro to come in and make the argument that queerness is a modern invention and queer people didn't exist in the past.

Everyone loves to see queerness represented in history, but the fact is that none of the stuff in this post would have been seen as explicitly gay and thus shouldn't be called gay today. If we are to understand queer history in its fullness and richness, it is absolutely crucial that we get it right. We owe it to our queer ancestors to recognize, honor, and not embellish the actual lives they lived.

#queer history #gay history #lgbt history #queer #gay #lgbt #Youtube

[thehateinc]

a real gay person needs to explain to me. am i allowed to not like the word queer or is that forbidden lmfao?

#im not a real gay person btw. #i like women but still not *really* gay #im a straight person who likes women. who has tendencies and preferences #(/hj /lh whatever) #i only ask bc i see so many different takes #and ive never really liked calling myself queer #but i easily and happily use it for others #but then i see takes that are like 'its really ignorant not to like the word queer' #and it's just. but i don't like it FOR ME. #is that wrong? #and i got in a spat with someone in class #bc i said something like... #oh u know we have to be aware of people who like. maybe not like that term bc they're from more conservative areas #and they went 'queer is reclaimed' #and i was like. huh okay f*ck me i guess #i have no idea #and im from a historically progressive area so i feel like the opinions i get are like. biased that way too #so while ofc i know it's not bad. and i'd never get on anyone for using it #it's like........ #idk. #me

[specialagentartemis]

I get variations on this comment on my post about history misinformation all the time: "why does it matter?" Why does it matter that people believe falsehoods about history? Why does it matter if people spread history misinformation? Why does it matter if people on tumblr believe that those bronze dodecahedra were used for knitting, or that Persephone had a daughter named Mespyrian? It's not the kind of misinformation that actually hurts people, like anti-vaxx propaganda or climate change denial. It doesn't hurt anyone to believe something false about the past.

Which, one, thanks for letting me know on my post that you think my job doesn't matter and what I do is pointless, if it doesn't really matter if we know the truth or make up lies about history because lies don't hurt anyone. But two, there are lots of reasons that it matters.

It encourages us to distrust historians when they talk about other aspects of history. You might think it's harmless to believe that Pharaoh Hatshepsut was trans. It's less harmless when you're espousing that the Holocaust wasn't really about Jews because the Nazis "came for trans people first." You might think it's harmless to believe that the French royalty of Versailles pooped and urinated on the floor of the palace all the time, because they were asshole rich people anyway, who cares, we hate the rich here; it's rather less harmless when you decide that the USSR was the communist ideal and Good, Actually, and that reports of its genocidal oppression are actually lies.

It encourages anti-intellectualism in other areas of scholarship. Deciding based on your own gut that the experts don't know what they're talking about and are either too stupid to realize the truth, or maliciously hiding the truth, is how you get to anti-vaxxers and climate change denial. It is also how you come to discount housing-first solutions for homelessness or the idea that long-term sustained weight loss is both biologically unlikely and health-wise unnecessary for the majority of fat people - because they conflict with what you feel should be true. Believing what you want to be true about history, because you want to believe it, and discounting fact-based corrections because you don't want them to be true, can then bleed over into how you approach other sociological and scientific topics.

How we think about history informs how we think about the present. A lot of people want certain things to be true - this famous person from history was gay or trans, this sexist story was actually feminist in its origin - because we want proof that gay people, trans people, and women deserve to be respected, and this gives evidence to prove we once were and deserve to be. But let me tell you a different story: on Thanksgiving of 2016, I was at a family friend's house and listening to their drunk conservative relative rant, and he told me, confidently, that the Roman Empire fell because they instituted universal healthcare, which was proof that Obama was destroying America. Of course that's nonsense. But projecting what we think is true about the world back onto history, and then using that as recursive proof that that is how the world is... is shoddy scholarship, and gets used for topics you don't agree with just as much as the ones you do. We should not be encouraging this, because our politics should be informed by the truth and material reality, not how we wish the past proved us right.

It frequently reinforces "Good vs. Bad" dichotomies that are at best unhelpful and at worst victim-blaming. A very common thread of historical misinformation on tumblr is about the innocence or benevolence of oppressed groups, slandered by oppressors who were far worse. This very frequently has truth to it - but makes the lies hard to separate out. It often simplifies the narrative, and implies that the reason that colonialism and oppression were bad was because the victims were Good and didn't deserve it... not because colonialism and oppression are bad. You see this sometimes with radical feminist mother goddess Neolithic feminist utopia stuff, but you also see it a lot regarding Native American and African history. I have seen people earnestly argue that Aztecs did not practice human sacrifice, that that was a lie made up by the Spanish to slander them. That is not true. Human sacrifice was part of Aztec, Maya, and many Central American war/religious practices. They are significantly more complex than often presented, and came from a captive-based system of warfare that significantly reduced the number of people who got killed in war compared to European styles of war that primarily killed people on the battlefield rather than taking them captive for sacrifice... but the human sacrifice was real and did happen. This can often come off with the implications of a 'noble savage' or an 'innocent victim' that implies that the bad things the Spanish conquistadors did were bad because the victims were innocent or good. This is a very easy trap to fall into; if the victims were good, they didn't deserve it. Right? This logic is dangerous when you are presented with a person or group who did something bad... you're caught in a bind. Did they deserve their injustice or oppression because they did something bad? This kind of logic drives a lot of transphobia, homophobia, racism, and defenses of Kyle Rittenhouse today. The answer to a colonialist logic of "The Aztecs deserved to be conquered because they did human sacrifice and that's bad" is not "The Aztecs didn't do human sacrifice actually, that's just Spanish propaganda" (which is a lie) it should be "We Americans do human sacrifice all the god damn time with our forever wars in the Middle East, we just don't call it that. We use bullets and bombs rather than obsidian knives but we kill way, way more people in the name of our country. What does that make us? Maybe genocide is not okay regardless of if you think the people are weird and scary." It becomes hard to square your ethics of the Innocent Victim and Lying Perpetrator when you see real, complicated, individual-level and group-level interactions, where no group is made up of members who are all completely pure and good, and they don't deserve to be oppressed anyway.

It makes you an unwitting tool of the oppressor. The favorite, favorite allegation transphobes level at trans people, and conservatives at queer people, is that we're lying to push the Gay Agenda. We're liars or deluded fools. If you say something about queer or trans history that's easy to debunk as false, you have permanently hurt your credibility - and the cause of queer history. It makes you easy to write off as a liar or a deluded fool who needs misinformation to make your case. If you say Louisa May Alcott was trans, that's easy to counter with "there is literally no evidence of that, and lots of evidence that she was fine being a woman," and instantly tanks your credibility going forward, so when you then say James Barry was trans and push back against a novel or biopic that treats James Barry as a woman, you get "you don't know what you're talking about, didn't you say Louisa May Alcott was trans too?" TERFs love to call trans people liars - do not hand them ammunition, not even a single bullet. Make sure you can back up what you say with facts and evidence. This is true of homophobes, of racists, of sexists. Be confident of your facts, and have facts to give to the hopeful and questioning learners who you are relating this story to, or the bigots who you are telling off, because misinformation can only hurt you and your cause.

It makes the queer, female, POC, or other marginalized listeners hurt, sad, and betrayed when something they thought was a reflection of their own experiences turns out not to be real. This is a good response to a performance art piece purporting to tell a real story of gay WWI soldiers, until the author revealed it as fiction. Why would you want to set yourself up for disappointment like that? Why would you want to risk inflicting that disappointment and betrayal on anyone else?

It makes it harder to learn the actual truth.

Historical misinformation has consequences, and those consequences are best avoided - by checking your facts, citing your sources, and taking the time and effort to make sure you are actually telling the truth.

#history #history and the world #misinformation