Anyone who has spent any amount of time in the realm of Fantasy Fandom is bound to come up against a most foul lot who would crusade for marginalisations and non-representation in fictional worlds based on myths of Medieval Europe. “HISTORICAL ACCURACY!” is what they would bellow shrilly, believing that they have triumphed with their superior yet concise reasoning. Yet they fail to perceive history’s lack of frail folk whose ears are tipped and who often are caricature of the supposed supremacy of the supposed white race. Nor do they question the existence of terrible winged and scaled worms who vomit the element of fire: creatures which have not been proven to have lived in the Middle Ages.
The Concept of Fantasy is, however, not powerful enough to destroy this wretched enemy. It must be wielded with its twin, the Uncovering of Historical Lies, in order to strike the Dudebro Inquisition at its very foundation. For you see, the great irony is that their Historical Accuracy is inaccurate.
Now is where I drop the gimmick and say that this shall be the first post in an irregular series which tries to debunk myths about history. Specifically, history which is drawn upon by works in the fantasy genre. This one, as the title says, will be about homosexual attitudes and behaviour in Medieval Europe.
If there were no homosexuality back then, why would the Church have rules against it? Did they throw charges of sodomy at everyone they did not like without knowing what the word meant? Of course not. Homosexuality was heavily suppressed during the Middle Ages, but there’s a difference between that and total non-existence. It is possible to create a culture where a people who once normalises or glorifies homosexual acts would come to lose the ability of same-gender attraction. But to completely eradicate these impulses which are so natural that they are observed in about 1500 animal species? Impossible.
I feel a little odd posting this here because I haven’t even seen enough of Once Upon a Time to follow all the excellent meta that’s been posted here already; I’ve only seen a handful of episodes. But I thought it was worth sharing:
But seriously, we live in a world in which we can have a show that vomits romance and True Love and Kissing Solves Everything Even Dark Magic(tm) all over the screen and when I say I want a certain romance to happen on that show, when I say, “Man I want those two characters to kiss already!”, the response can be . . . “Nope, sorry, it’s a family show“????
The rant is more about society than it is about the show itself: the way OUAT has set itself up with the “family show” label, and the double-standard that means they can show gobs and gobs of opposite-sex kissing but the chance of a same-sex relationship is slim to none.
Which, what? Why does a show have to be “edgy” for even a sweet, non-explicit same-sex romance to be likely? Why can’t we apply the same standard to same-sex kisses that we do to opposite-sex ones? Why, when I watch a show overflowing with couples, is the one romantic pairing I like dead before it started, just because it happens to be two women? What the fuck is that?
I don’t mind that OUAT wants to give itself a “family” label. But I feel infuriated that “family” somehow means, “keep the queer out COOTIES!!” It’s homophobic and shitty and really just stupid.
(Note: I’m not privy to OUAT’s marketing strategies, so maybe I’m totally off base and idiotically assuming and they don’t consider same-sex couples to be taboo at all. Maybe they’ve been building up the couple I like from the beginning. It’s possible. I will gladly, GLADLY proclaim I am wrong on this one if that happens.)
Hello everyone, and welcome to the tenth episode of Brain Food, wherein I review Bitter Girl, by former DC editor and full time cartoonist and illustrator, Joan Hilty!
I hope that everyone enjoys it and follows me along as I continue to make these videos. I owe a lot to the people who watched my videos and offered their input as well as books for me to read. So long as I can find and read books, then I am going to make these videos and boost the signal on authours and books that should be read.
Sorry for the long absence between posts — and thanks to all the posters new and familiar who continue to do completely awesome and eye-opening things while I’m off in the wilds of conference planning and manuscript editing. I’m making up for the lost time by writing an extra-long post — aren’t you excited?
Earlier today, romance blog Dear Author posted a news item that m/m romance author AJ Llewellyn — oh, what was the delicate phrasing they used? — “admits adopting male persona despite being female.”
Hello everyone and welcome to Episode 8 of Brain Food, wherein I discuss books past and present that were, well, waste of money, as well as my conflicted emotions on one digital comic, which wasn’t, as a friend suggested, money wasted but money donated.
Hello one and all, and welcome to another new post here, in where I give to you the first three episodes of Brain Food, a series I started a little while ago to review the debut novel of a friend of mine, Dennis Upkin’s Hollowstone.
The idea of this series to is discuss published books and comics which are outside the norm, and by the norm I mean more adventures of the mighty whitey straight guy who gets the girl and saves the world. There is an entire world out there of authours and artists who wish to bring forth entire fictional worlds that help us to escape reality while also giving us something new to consider. I am proud to bring these stories to light because they are good, and they are worth the time and money that should be invested in them.
So lets start this off, shall we?
Episode 1: Hollowstone
Episode 2: Aspire #1
Episode 3: Flesh Which is not Flesh
I hope that everyone enjoys these reviews and the stories that I review. I have more on the way, with a review of Miranda Lo’s Huntress, as well as Terry Moore’s Hero.