fialleril: [Something there is that doesn't love a wall] (Sleipnir's mothers)
Browsing through a used book store this afternoon, I decided to take a look at some older books on Norse mythology for the lulz, and came across a real gem.

(It came from this book, in fact, in its original printing.)

In the course of a retelling of the story about the building of Asgard's wall, the author informed his readers that the giant building the wall was doing so with the help of a mare, and that, in order to distract the mare, Loki turned himself into a stallion, and that the other horse gave birth to Loki's son Sleipnir.

Because Loki can be a horse, sure, no big, but GOD FORBID Loki should be a woman, or (horrors!) give birth. We have got to protect Loki's precious masculinity, am I right?

It's funny because I feel like Padraic Colum is going out of his way to "protect" Loki from the accusation of being unmanly, which is basically the Aesir's favorite accusation against Loki in the mythology. 'Cause there's no worse insult than being called female.

Ha ha ha ha fuck you.
fialleril: [Spock disapproves of your poor life choices] (what is this even)
[Trigger Warning for: heteronormativity, heterosexism, asexual and aromantic erasure, slut shaming, gender essentialism, theological abuse.]

I should know better than to read anything on "singles" put out by a Catholic publication, let alone a publication like Our Sunday Visitor. And yet...sometimes I guess I just have to know what I'm up against.

I mean, this is only a tiny fragment of the horribleness:

Although it may be reassuring, in some ways, that today’s unmarried Catholics have lots of company in the single life, it’s also a problem. Never before have quite so many adults, Catholics or otherwise, delayed marriage quite so late in life. Some delay by choice. Others by chance. But marriage is delayed regardless. And the results are often less than rosy.


Even if a nice Catholic girl or boy is found, however, other problems often get in the way of marriage. Many nice Catholics girls and boys haven’t always been nice Catholic girls and boys. Some have made mistakes in the past that haunt them still.

Others bear the wounds of past breakups, divorce or misguided notions about career, family, personal responsibility, the meaning of happiness and the ends of marriage.

- Being single in the universal Church

Click the link if you want to appreciate how truly terrible it is, and commiserate in my pain.

... And people wonder why I'm not "out" in my church community.
fialleril: [my favorite shapeshifting genderqueer trickster] (Loki)
And no one cares! Whoops. Oh well, I guess this is my life now. At least the muse is back.

Title: both/and
Characters: Loki, Thor, Njord
Rating: PG
Word Count: 100
Summary: Loki is a shapeshifting genderqueer trickster. These things happen.
Warning: For the Aesir being awful to anyone who doesn't fit neatly within the gender binary.
Notes: Inspired by a couple of comment threads in this post, about Loki's queerness and relationship to the entire concept of gender. Also by Lokasenna, in which Loki insults the other gods, and their standard comeback is basically, "Well, at least I'm not a womanish god who's borne children!" This is just a short drabble and only scratches the surface of the concept, but I may expand on it someday.

both/and )
fialleril: [still my favorite film Holmes] (Basil of Baker Street)
is this week!

If you lurk around my journal for any time at all you already know I'm asexaul, and I post about it pretty frequently (mostly in fandom contexts). What I talk about a little less often is my romantic orientation, but, as I've been realizing lately that this orientation is probably much more impactful on my daily life than is my sexual orientation, and is also the thing that makes me a bit more publicly other, I thought I would make a post about that!

Here there be long-winded, self-important rambling. )

And on a related note, I would like to write some further adventures of Sherlock Holmes, Ace Detective, for the occasion of this week, but find myself in want of prompts! Sherlock fans on the f-list, anything you would like to see?
fialleril: [y'all don't know 'bout my flawless logic] (T'Pring)
Or, the promised Halloween pics plus a good bit of unexpected and unwanted drama on the side. Things which have forced me to add "overidentifying with Vulcans" to my LJ interest list in an effort to bring something at least kind of amusing out of the situation.

But first the good things. We had a Halloween potluck at our JV house on Friday, to which none of the people we were required to invite actually came. This was, in fact, not a bad thing, since we didn't know any of those people, anyway. And some folks Amy knew from work and an awesome lady named Adriane who is a friend of one of our support people did come. (It turns out Adriane is a hairdresser and is going to cut our hair for free tonight, so!) Also our other support person, Mary Ellen, and one of her friends. Good times were had. We held a costume contest and gave away some truly awful, glow-in-the-dark pictures of Jesus as prizes. (They were donated to us, but they had to go. It was for the best.)

Under this cut there are pictures! And incoherent asexual rage! )
fialleril: [somebody's gotta save our skins] (voice of reason)
I should have known better than to pick up a book called Single State of the Union, especially with that cover. But I was optimistic as always, and I thought that possibly this was relevant to my interests. So.

Some of it really wasn't that bad. The introduction made some good points about media treatment of single women as either washed up old maids living unfulfilled lives or sex-crazed man stealers waiting to suck your wallet dry. And it was nice to see a book of essays by single women saying that yes, shockingly, we can be happy and fulfilled without "a relationship."

But honestly, in a book with over twenty essays about the experiences of single women, was it really impossible to include even one asexual perspective? And even if for some strange reason (or not so strange: read heteronormativity) it was impossible, was it really necessary for practically every essay to begin with some variation on "I'm not a frigid asexual, but..."?

I understand that part of the feminist project has been to reclaim sexuality - so often associated with the female - as a good. And yes, I'm actually very sympathetic to that goal. But reclaiming sex as a good without also challenging the basic equation woman = sexuality is not really going to change much. It also puts those of us who identify as asexual in the position of "problem" not only for the patriarchy, which has seen us as "unnatural" and in need of mental help for centuries, but also for (many) feminists, who in their efforts to reclaim sex as a good seem positively terrified of acknowledging the existence of asexuals, presumably on the grounds that to acknowledge them would negate the good of sexuality.

I reject this false dichotomy entirely, and I'm glad to say that there are many, many other feminists and womanists who do as well. Unfortunately, there's still a lot who don't, and probably a lot who have never even considered the possibility that someone might be asexual.

I want to give this book the benefit of the doubt and say that it falls into the latter category, but there are enough references to "oh those frigid asexuals, destroying the media's view of single women" that I can't quite convince myself of that.

So to the authors of those essays, here's a little note. You'll probably never read this, of course, but I feel it needs to be said. This asexual, who's quite happy with her single life and really isn't frigid at all, would like to point out that your privilege is showing.

October 2012

 12 3456
2122 2324252627



RSS Atom