a short list of historical figures who were queer: because I need people to understand that queer people have always been here.
with sources, because I am, after all, a historian.
Most of these figures are musicans, it is because I am studying to be a historical musicologist (basically a music historian).
Leonard Berenstein– (1918-1990) Composer, conductor, musician. Known for his musical West Side Story. Most likely a gay man, perhaps bisexual. While there are plenty of letters and first hand confirmations that exist, this Guardian article conveys the information well enough.
Pytor Illich Tchaikovsky– (1840-1892) Russian composer, best known for his ballets: Swan Lake, and the Nutcracker, as well as his 1812 Overture, which features canon fire (and has become a meme on Tumblr). A gay man, as confirmed by multiple historians that have dedicated their life to his research, and by me, who spent a few weeks translating letters that talk about his love for men and his fear of what that would do to his life. This article talks about John Wiley (a historian) had to say about it.
Benjamin Britten– (1913-1976) Known for his vocal compositions, if you are an english classically trained vocalist you know Britten's compositions. Known especially for his War Requiem and his opera Peter Grimes. He and fellow musician Peter Pears had a long lived relationship. This article speaks about it more.
Ethel Smyth– (1857-1944) A lifelong disrupter, demanded (rightly so) for people to listen to her music in a time where women were not given the space to compose. A lesbian who fought for the right for women to perform and be a part of orchestras and conductor her own works when women conducters were few and far between. This article, written by a woman, speaks on her life well.
Francis Poulenc– (1899-1963) A Parisian man with a marked love of mostly men, but did father one daughter and dedicated a few compositions to her mother. This article speaks well on his love.
Alan Turing– (1912-1954) A gay icon of mine, Turing was a British Mathmetician and codebreaker who you have to thank for your phone and for the earlier end of the second World War. This article speaks about his life, as well as the film Imitation Game (2014) discusses it to some extent.
Freddie Mercury–(1946-1991) The beloved lead singer of the band Queen was a notourious queer icon, who had many love affairs with men but did say that he loved one woman when he was younger, for this reason, I will not say whether he was bisexual or gay. But a queer icon nonetheless. This article discusses the topic.
David Bowie– (1947-2016) A performer I have always loved and dearly miss, who is known for his bisexuality and fantastic outfits. This Billboard article discusses his sexuality. But it is important to note, that he came out as gay first, and then bisexual, which does not mean he was changing his mind or wanting to conform, but instead was becoming more comfortable with his own sexuality as he aged, something that should be a more generally accepted thing.
Leonardo da Vinci– (1452-1519) While there are guesses about this mans sexuality, it is generally believed and agreed upon that he was at least queer. While more research must be done, this article speaks on the subject well enough.
There are plenty more that I could talk about and that I want to talk about but that would take so long.
The most important thing: Queer people have always been here, and they are amazing and beautiful and deserved so much better than what history gave them.
Please reply with more (and sources) if you have them.
51 notes
·
View notes
I keep seeing critics talking about the fnaf movie being poor but it literally isn't for them. I saw someone else saying the movie's a love letter to the fandom and i WHOLEHARTEDLY agree.
This is how i took it: We, the fans, are Anton Ego, the critic from Ratatouille; the ratatouille was special to us because it was our childhood. I hate ratatouille (the food), but to Anton Ego it was everything. Critics don't like the fnaf movie because they only have the movie as context, but to fans, the fnaf movie is everything and we love it even though it's a little cringey. In fact we love it BECAUSE it's cringey in some cases.
Like no new viewers would get the chica's magic rainbow part, or the MatPat reference, or the whole ongoing bit about Dream Theory sucking, or understand how hype the whole ending part was.
I was lucky to be in a cinema full of fnaf fans, and we were cheering and laughing, and screaming at the references. People got up when the movie ended and SAT BACK DOWN when the living tombstone came on. We shouted the letters of the code, and screamed when Matpat said his line. People clapped and cheered at the end, and people were crying at the parts where they were treating the animatronics with love and affection.
No critics would understand how much fans want to interact with the animatronics in a positive way, or understand how much importance the five seconds of its me on the mirror means in implications of the lore. They wouldn't understand because they haven't been waiting a good part of a decade to see this movie. They came, they saw, and that's it, it was a second of their life, but to us it was everything. This is our ratatouille, made to impress us, not the other people in the restaurant. This was our movie, a love letter to the fandom, not the critics.
I like the changes to the story, because it puts us back at square one. We're fumbling to rearrange lore and timelines. We have to rearrange names, and start with a blank slate, and it feels like a homecoming where to critics, it might feel a little messy.
We've been given a chance to start the journey all over again and i fucking love it so much. Because i'm an adult, and all of a sudden, i'm twelve years old again and we're trying to figure out if phone guy is chica, and struggling our way through whatever the fuck was happening in fnaf 3 to get the good ending. The critics don't get this.
They don't understand how hype the midnight motorists reference is, nor did they care about the references on the chalkboard. Or the code at the end, or the song choices, or the lore implications. They don't understand the sudden lore drop of william afton, or the way he's acting, but we do. They don't understand the vengeful spirit, but we do. Nothing is explained to the audience, because we don't need it to be explained.
This is our ratatouille, and we love the rats in the kitchen.
3K notes
·
View notes
while im at it neopronoun opposition is weird to me as a swedish person.. the whole debate is so anglocentric that they assume every language landed on the same solution they did, to reuse a plural pronoun as a gender neutral one and then they think any other solution is absurd or unheard of. what do you mean you just made another pronoun up you cant do that!! etc
coz its like here in the 2014 the swedish academy accepted 3rd person pronoun "hen" (as opposed to hon/han) like officially into our word list after it gained some popularity in the 2010s. like that is a NEOPRONOUN that someone just Came Up With in like the 60s and then people just started using it and now its just a recognized part of our language. sure we could've also reused our plural pronoun "de/dem" as a gender neutral one but we just made up a new one instead. and to like imply that mainstream use of a neopronoun is just UNHEARD OF and that neopronouns is something the mainstream could NEVER GET USED TO EVER!!! is... your perspective is very limited to the english speaking world is all i can say
13K notes
·
View notes
I've had a brainworm for a few days now so here me out.
After an accidental reveal gone wrong, Danny is forced to flee the country with both his parents and the giw after him. While he's trying to find some place internationally to settle down, he comes across a secluded complex.
Said complex happens to have access to an ectoplasm run off which Danny is in desperate need of. Though it has been corrupted by whatever the people of the complex have been doing to it, that's no problem for Danny as he can easily purify the portion he takes in to survive.
Deciding this is the perfect place to live off the grid, Danny sets to work figuring out how to blend in. It turns out that's the easy part. With his temporary stint as a ninja, his training with his black belt mom, and his general ghost physiology, he fits in pretty well.
He fits in so well in fact that he is told he'll be training someone one of the head bosses has their eye on. A kid his age.
Basically what follows is Danny accidentally ruining Talia's plans for Jason by unconsciously purifying his corruption and just talking him through his emotions. When Jason gets back to Gotham, he returns without a clouded mentally and realizes just how much Bruce went through after his death.
Instead of unleashing his complicated plan, he quietly takes over the underworld. He loves his father but also knows there are situations in Gotham that require a more firm hand. Jason decides to be a firm hand in his dad's place.
(I imagine he is only revealed on accident yet his reunion with his family is just as dramatic as Under the Red Hood. Tbh it probably has something to do with the joker suddenly going missing.)
Meanwhile back at the League of Assassins, Talia is impressed by Jason's training and is under the impression that his failure in Gotham is due to him getting cold feet at the last second so she puts Danny in charge of Damian's training.
Danny this time takes a more conscious role in ruining the league's brainwashing by challenging Damian's beliefs and teaching him he should use his weapons to protect, not to harm. By the time Damian gets to Wayne Manor, there is significantly less deprogramming that needs to be done.
3K notes
·
View notes