Because they’ve advanced the success and growth of those fields for just as long as men, even when they weren’t afforded the opportunity, the recognition, or the grants. Onward:
Rosalind Franklin (July 25, 1920—April 16, 1958)
Rosalind Franklin was a chemist and, get this, X-ray crystallographer. As far as titles go, you can’t do much better than crystallographer. Her work in understanding the molecular structure of DNA laid the foundation for the discovery of the double helix. She also made significant contributions to understanding the structures of RNAs. And viruses. And coal. And graphite. Her work was not fully appreciated until after she passed away. Two teams of all-male scientists who used her work to discover great things later went on to win Nobel Prizes.
Rebecca Lee Crumpler (February 8, 1831—March 9, 1895)
Rebecca Lee Crumpler spent most of her professional life being the first at things. She was the very first Black woman to become a physician in the United States. The first (and only) Black woman to graduate from New England Female Medical College. She authored Book of Medical Discourses, one of the very first medical books written by a Black person. Every obstacle she powered through was done in an effort to provide care for other people. Hero.
Mary Anning (May 21, 1799—March 9, 1847)
Mary Anning discovered the first full Ichthyosaur skeleton at 11, the very first Plesiosaur at 22, and then opened up her own fossil store front a few years later. We repeat: She opened up her own fossil store. We could go on and on, but Rejected Princesses (@rejectedprincesses) already did it best in this biographical comic. While you’re over there, check out their whole archive and the dozens and dozens of women’s life stories within.
Follow these too:
She Thought It: Crossing Bodies in Sciences and Arts (@shethoughtit) is a database dedicated to shedding light on women making strides in both science and the arts. A whole bunch of great things.
Lady Scientists of Tumblr (@scientific-women) promises everything you could ever want from a feminist science round-up blog: intersectionality and equal representation of all scientists who identify as female. Hell yeah.
Math Brain (@ihaveamathbrain) backs the novel idea that women are indeed capable of understanding math. Shocking. With the perfect amount of sarcasm, they tackle the idea some bozos have that women just don’t have the mind for mathematics.
‘Queer’ was reclaimed as an umbrella term for people identifying as not-heterosexual and/or not-cisgender in the early 1980s, but being queer is more than just being non-straight/non-cis; it’s a political and ideological statement, a label asserting an identity distinct from gay and/or traditional gender identities.
People identifying as queer are typically not cis gays or cis lesbians, but bi, pan, ace, trans, nonbinary, intersex, etc.: we’re the silent/ced letters. We’re the marginalised majority within the LGBTQIA+ community, and
‘queer’ is our rallying cry.
And that’s equally pissing off and terrifying terfs and cis LGs.
There’s absolutely no historical or sociolinguistic reason why ‘queer’ should be a worse slur than ‘gay.’ Remember how we had all those campaigns to make people stop using ‘gay’ as a synonym for ‘bad’?
Yet nobody is suggesting we should abolish ‘gay’ as a label. We accept that even though ‘gay’ sometimes is and historically frequently was used in a derogatory manner, mlm individuals have the right to use that word. We have ad campaigns, twitter hashtags, and viral Facebook posts defending ‘gay’ as an identity label and asking people to stop using it as a slur.
Whereas ‘queer’ is treated exactly opposite: a small but vocal group of people within feminist and LGBTQIA+ circles insists that it’s a slur and demands that others to stop using it as a personal, self-chosen identity label.
Why?
Because “queer is a slur” was invented by terfs specifically to exclude trans, nonbinary, and
intersex people from feminist and non-heterosexual discourse, and was
subsequently adopted by cis gays and cis lesbians to exclude bi/pan and ace
people.
It’s classic divide-and-conquer tactics: when our umbrella term is redefined as a slur and we’re harassed into silence for using it, we no longer have a word for what we are allowing us to organise for social/political/economic support; we are denied the opportunity to influence or shape the spaces we inhabit; we can’t challenge existing community power structures; we’re erased from our own history.
Pro tip: when you alter historical evidence to deny a marginalised group empowerment, you’re one of the bad guys.
“Queer is a slur” is used by terfs and cis gays/lesbians to silence the voices of trans/nonbinary/intersex/bi/pan/ace people in society and even within our own communities, to isolate us and shame us for existing.
“Queer is a slur” is saying “I am offended by people who do not conform to traditional gender or sexual identities because they are not sexually available to me or validate my personal identity.”
“Queer is a slur” is defending heteronormativity.
“Queer is a slur” is frankly embarrassing. It’s an admission of ignorance and prejudice. It’s an insidious discriminatory discourse parroted uncritically in support of a divisive us-vs-them mentality targeting the most vulnerable members of the LGBTQIA+ community for lack of courage to confront the white cis straight men who pose an actual danger to us as individuals and as a community.
Tl;dr:
I’m here, I’m queer, and I’m too old for this shit.
I initially reblogged this without commentary, which implies endorsement, but on further reflection, I have to point out that “queer” is still used as a slur. Yes, it was reclaimed and now has an important political and ideological legacy. Yes, it is powerful in a positive way for many people. Erasing that part of the word’s history is unacceptable and anyone taking the stance that “queer” has never been anything but an insult at the very least need to learn some history. But stating unequivocally that queer is not a slur is just … untrue. Implying that LGBTQA+ people who have had “queer” used as a pejorative against them and therefore don’t feel comfortable with “queer” are defending heterosexuality is frankly offensive to them.
Also, this is the first I’m hearing about terfs “redefining” the term “queer” as a slur, I’m not really sure what’s going on there.
(yes, I’m queer and have been for like a decade. I like the term, personally. Of course, no one ever called me that in order to wound me, so it has no negative connotations for me.)
But stating unequivocally that queer is not a slur is just … untrue.
Implying that LGBTQA+ people who have had “queer” used as a pejorative
against them and therefore don’t feel comfortable with “queer” are
defending heterosexuality is frankly offensive to them.
1.
I’m not saying ‘queer’ has never been used in a derogatory way; of course it has. Every word can be an insult if it’s used as one, and this goes double for reclaimed terminology. ‘Gay’ and ‘queer’ are two such words, but we could also mention words like ‘fat’ and how it is being reclaimed by the fat acceptance movement, or the N-word being used by PoC. Both ‘fat’ and the N-word are loaded with meanings: historical, emotional, social, and political. Everyone understands that calling someone fat or the N-word as insults is hurtful and unacceptable behaviour, just like calling someone gay or queer as insults is also hurtful and unacceptable.
However, “queer is a slur” is not a statement of fact pointing out the obvious notion that ‘queer’ can be and sometimes is used to insult people. “Queer is a slur” is a trans-exclusionary catchphrase coined to shame queer people into silence. The original post above is a textbook example: a person who does not identify as queer messages a complete stranger (me) who does identify as queer for the sole reason of telling her 1) your chosen label is offensive (= your existence is offensive to me), 2) “grow up” = change your label.
If queer had been a triggering word to the sender of the message, they
could have taken any number of steps to protect themselves from seeing triggering content on their dash: asking me to tag posts containing the word, using one of the tumblr blacklist tools I linked in my second post, or simply blocking me. But they didn’t; they told me to stop self-identifying as queer, to censor the language I use about myself and my community. That is an act of aggression.
2.
Implying that {not feeling] comfortable with “queer” [is]
defending heterosexuality
Not heterosexuality. Heteronormativity. ‘Queer’ is a self-identifier used primarily by people who reject the binary gender paradigm, traditional gender roles, genital myopia, and the understanding of sexuality which uses heterosexuality as the golden standard from which all other sexualities deviate.
There’s sadly a lot of heteronormativity in gay and lesbian groupings, especially where lesbians and terfs overlap, and it’s marginalising trans, nonbinary, genderqueer, intersex, and similar people in the LGBTQIA+ community in particular. The people saying “queer is a slur” are usually the same people saying trans women aren’t women and don’t belong in female (especially lesbian) spaces, that trans women and passing trans men have male privilege, that ace people are heterosexual, etc.
This all comes back to terfs and their branding of ‘queer’ as a slur to target trans people and prevent them from organising with other members of the community, and gays and lesbians co-opting it to marginalise and gatekeep bi/pan and ace people. There’s a movement among terfs and LGs, especially online, to prevent this:
So yes, ‘queer’ can be used as a slur. But “queer is a slur” is a very specific phrase meaning “if you’re not gay or lesbian, you don’t deserve a voice in your own community.” Be on high alert when you observe someone saying “queer a slur” to an actual queer-identified person. It’s a censorship technique.
Dr. Willie Parker, who is trained as a gynecologist and OBGYN, is a hero for the pro-choice movement because he’s honest about the undiscussed aspects of getting (or not getting) an abortion. Watch how he gives a consultation.
That last statement about regret is so important, because so many people don’t understand what it is or what causes it. Anti-choicers exploit this by manipulating pregnant people and creating doubt, which only increases the likelihood of regret, no matter what decision the pregnant person makes. You know what is best for you, even if it takes some time to figure it out.
Last night, black-ish brought us into the middle of the tough conversations black families have been forced to have more and more recently. It did so with the utmost thought and humor, all the while giving nuanced, important depth to the issues of police brutality — including the characterization of police.
Last night I dreamt that Channing Tatum nervously presented me with a dress he’d knitted for me. He clenched his (big, work-roughened) hands in anxious fists while I unfolded it.
“You don’t have to wear it,” he said, before I could say anything.
The dress was perfect. It was beautiful. It could turn into a skirt.
“You like it?” Channing Tatum said, smiling crookedly.
So, a week or so ago I made a post about wanting to learn about Finn’s parentage. Naturally, as with seemingly most posts about Finn that get more than a hundred notes a couple of comments were posted that derailed my post from its original intent.
Sure, some were worse than others, but even the ones that might have been posted with no ill intent still held a similar message: Finn doesn’t need to learn about his parents.
Let’s just ignore the fact that this fandom has been borderline obsessed with Rey’s parentage for over a year now and at no point have I seen anyone say that she doesn’t need to know who her parents are because “She found family in Finn” or whatever because that bit of hypocrisy is a discussion for another post.
No, what this post is going to be about has more to do with why I want Finn to learn about his parents after I got yet another person pleading the case for why Finn doesn’t need parents on that post. Because it actually goes just a bit deeper for me then just wanting Finn to have blood relatives of his own.
You see…I’m black. African American specifically, and like many people who are a part of the African diaspora I don’t know exactly where my ancestors originally hailed from. I don’t know what their culture was like, what religions they practiced, the languages they spoke etc. And being disconnected from that part of my heritage has always kinda left me with a hurt feeling in my chest.
Now let me be clear for a moment and say that black people aren’t a monolith so this thing that I’m describing is not something every black person has experienced or can relate to. I’m just talking about my experiences. But anyway back to my point. Finn getting a chance to meet his parent(s) is more than just him getting reconnected with his blood relatives.
Because if/when Finn meets his parents is the moment he gets to learn about what planet he’s from. What his planet’s culture is like, what language they speak, how they view or practice the Force and a number of other things and experiences that Finn will get a chance to reconnect to.
Finn reconnecting with his planet and his culture after getting ripped away from it when he was young and forced to assimilate into an oppressive and abusive regime would be pretty incredible to see and that’s why Finn meeting his parents is so important to me.
I’m sure your comments on how Finn doesn’t need parents and that Rey and Poe are his family now have good intentions, but they really aren’t needed.
Oh wow. I adore Finn and I’m so happy we’ll be getting more of his story this winter, and yet this never occurred to me.
Very important point.
I love the ‘Finn is actually a long lost prince’ headcanons tbh
Steel Phoenix Studios 