I will always and forever be fascinated by customer’s weird gender hangups. 

(on tapastic)

 (via sleepingjuliette)





and GUN


(via acciomjolnir)


This weekend, I watched a few LEGO commercials - after all, it’s almost Black Friday, which means Holiday Shopping time.  Every commercial featured a boy, usually with his father.  Then today, someone put this up on my Facebook page: Goldie Blox, engineering toys built to a “girl’s” perspective.

The awesome: Our mission is to create really fun toys that develop spatial skills and teach basic engineering principles. By designing construction toys from the female perspective, we aim to appeal to a broader audience of children and parents who previously considered engineering a “boys club.”  …also, there’s obviously a demand for this shit, since according to their Facebook page, their first order is sold out.

The tick: Gender normativity means these are “girl toys” and LEGOs are “boy toys”.  I was lucky enough to grow up with a million LEGO sets; and I think parents should be encouraging the boundary crossing. However, I think this is an equally important step, albeit a slightly problematic one.  (Also, the Facebook page is encouraging moms to “open her world beyond the pink aisle,” so that’s good!)

Nevertheless: A thing that is worth talking about.  Goldie Blox, find out more.  


I want to talk about the top right photo.

Traditionally, blatant leg-spread posing really irritates me, regardless of gender, in photography.  Whenever women are photographed in that way, there’s frequently a phallic shape on the floor between their legs - a wine bottle, a weird vague pyramid, whatever - and an expression on their face or body language that indicates that they would very much like to be fucked, by you, the viewer.  It’s a position of submission for women, and a position of dominance for men.  Men with their legs spread are viewed as regal, kingly, powerful.  (See: 99% of Tom Hiddleston’s Photoshoots)

That photo of Gina Torres has always been my very, very favorite picture of any actress, ever.  Because she assumes the male body language - the “I am going to fuck the shit out of you and you are going to like it” expression and posture - the regal, kingly, powerful traits are applied to her.  But her hair and her clothing are both undeniably feminine in this pose.  This is no actress stuffed into a man’s suit and tie and made to look coy and weirdly delicate despite her masculine dress.  This is a woman, powerful, strong, assuming a man’s pose, taking it for her own, putting some frilly lace on it, and telling you to suck up and deal with it. 

She is showing you what’s between her legs, and she’s proud of it.  She’s embracing her sexuality and her gender and the power that comes with both, and if you can’t deal with that, you can go to hell.

(Source: frankinchesters, via withthingsunreal)