Princess of the Stars- (short- almost didn’t make it b/c high school flashbacks but it’s college roomies and it’s short and sweet- and challenges that “girls experiment with girls in high school then grow out of it” thing that people in Japan sometimes think)
Ohana Holoholo: Torino Shino (Saya lives with her bisexual former girlfriend and her son. Nico, an actor living up stairs and a close friend, drops by for a visit almost everyday. Somewhat like family, and somewhat not, a story about their lives)
My Unique Day-Sakamoto Mano (women in an acting troupe together. one shot)
Abracadabra- Tanaka Minoru (a magician and a cute girl dealing with confessing to a girl for the first time)
Octave- Akiyama Haru (seinen manga; a talent manager and a songwriter)
This is by no means an exhaustive list and I know there’s more (one particularly that I wanted to put on here but couldn’t remember the title of) so feel free to add on your favorite adult queer lady manga to the list!
Warning: Free Soul has a heavy odor of fetishism of black bodies by the main character, as well as tones of anti-blackness, and I’m only in chapter 2 and doubt I will reading much further.
I really should not have expected much from Japanese manga artists but I did and I was disappointed that someone went to the whole trouble to draw a whole manga about their little fetish.
Reblogging for the warning. This was one of the ones that I haven’t read all the way through and I almost didn’t put on the list because I was worried about that vibe I got in the beginning as well.
As a child, Leela Hazzah would spend her summer nights lying on the rooftop of her family’s home in Egypt.
Her father and uncle had told her stories of their childhood, when they would sleep on the same rooftop and hear lions roaring.
"I used to lay there, listening for those same sounds. But I didn’t hear anything," Hazzah said.
Hazzah’s father finally got the courage to tell his young daughter that she would not hear lions roaring because they had long since gone extinct in Egypt.
"That was the moment when I decided I knew what I wanted to do," Hazzah said. "I wanted to hear lions roaring."
Hazzah, now 34, has since devoted her life to lion conservation. While earning her master’s in conservation biology, Hazzah’s research led her to Kenya. She lived in a tree house and began seeing firsthand the rapid decline of African lions due to habitat loss and human-lion conflict.
Now armed with a doctorate in environmental studies, Hazzah has found one solution to help the lion population grow. Her nonprofit turns Maasai warriors — who have a tradition of killing lions — into lion protectors.The organization employs 65 Lion Guardians throughout East Africa. Their ultimate goal: reduce lion killings.
"The lion is iconic," said Hazzah, who started Lion Guardians in 2007. "If there are no lions left in Africa, it will have a significant effect. … We could lose a lot more than just the lion."
Changing a culture
Hazzah spent a year living among the Maasai to understand their relationship with lions and why they were killing them.
For one, young warriors receive their lion name when they first kill a lion, a sort of rite of passage.
"It brings a huge amount of prestige to the warrior who kills a lion," Hazzah said.
The Maasai also live a mostly pastoral life and depend on their livestock. They use it to feed their families; they use it for currency. Livestock is also a status symbol.
"Livestock are the core of their culture. … It’s their main source of livelihood," Hazzah said. "When they lose their cows, they don’t have anything left. So they retaliate, and they kill lions."
Hazzah’s idea for Lion Guardians came together while living in the community and spending time with the warriors.
"They started opening up and telling me stories," she said. "That’s when it clicked."
Hazzah realized that Maasai warriors, the leaders and protectors in their community, would be the best ambassadors for lions. She began teaching them the benefits of protecting lions, with an emphasis on preserving their culture. In turn, the lessons began rippling through the entire tribe.
"Maasai have a very close-knit relationship with lions. It’s very much a love-and-hate relationship," Hazzah said. "They dislike them because they eat their livestock, but they also admire them tremendously because they are just beautiful animals."
From hunter to guardian
Today, protecting lions is a full-time job for a guardian, who earns around $100 a month.
Hazzah and her team teach the guardians a number of methods to reduce human-lion conflict in their communities.
If a guardian hears about a lion hunt, he intervenes. He helps the individuals understand the importance of keeping lions alive, including that lions draw tourists to the area, which provides jobs.
Guardians also help farmers strengthen corrals where they keep their livestock. They also help find and safely return lost livestock. These measures have prevented livestock deaths and, more importantly, retaliatory lion killings.
"Becoming a Lion Guardian is a rebirth for (the Massai). They gain even more prestige than they would have from killing a lion," Hazzah said.
Most Maasai warriors come to Lion Guardians illiterate, having never attended school. Hazzah and her team teach each one how to read and write.
They also learn how to keep data on the lions’ movements and population changes, a part of their job. The group’s director of biology, Stephanie Dolrenry, provides the technical field training and equipment the guardians need to track lions.
For Hazzah, watching the transformation of young Maasai warriors has been one of the most rewarding parts of her efforts.
"We never imagined when we first started Lion Guardians that we could transform these killers to the point where they would risk their own lives to stop other people from killing lions," she said.
Hazzah said the Lion Guardian program has had great success in the Amboseli region of Kenya. When used alone or with other conservation programs, the program was 99% effective in stopping lion killings.
"I know we’re making a difference," Hazzah said. "When I first moved here, I never heard lions roaring. But now I hear lions roaring all the time."
Dakarai Molokomme, a 15-year-old starving child from a small village in Zimbabwe, has just told Madonna, one of the most famous pop stars in the world, to go and f*** herself, the local media are reporting exclusively.
“Yes, it’s true, I told Madonna to go f*** herself. Do you want to know why?” Dakarai asked. “It’s the same thing every time with these snobby rich Americans. Every once in a while they come to show us their support for the so-called eradication of poverty by adopting a child from a starving family, but they actually do more harm than good. Transracial international adoptions are part of the white savior industrial complex,” Dakarai explained.
In further discussions with journalists from the media, the kid stated that “none of the children here actually want to be taken away from their family and friends so they can be displayed as some kind of trophy in the homes of self-righteous singers or actors who want to score some points with the media and Oprah.”
“If they really want to help us, they should get Big Pharma to ship us some anti-retroviral drugs for the AIDS epidemic, or build schools and hospitals. If they don’t want to do that, then they can all go f** themselves!” the child told reporters.
The 15-year-old also stated that he would say the same thing to any one of those American or European “faux humanitarian posers”, except for Bono, whom he said he would also kick in the groin.
“Bono’s efforts to save the African savage from itself prove that the colonial imperative is alive and well,” Dakarai said as he walked with other village children collecting sticks to build a tree fort.
Hey Shychemist. I've been following your blog for awhile and I want to bring up something that seems dated but nonetheless holds to be accurate today. I feel like the girls who consider themselves to be on the science side of tumblr to be horribly mistaken. It's statistically proven that women applicants struggle to get into stem doctorate programs, and rightfully so, they don't belong there. examples- atomic-o-licious, brainsx , adventuresinchemistry, i can't fit anymore but you get it
It doesn’t seem dated, your attitude is dated. This is the 21st century.
Women deserve to be in STEM programs just as much as men. I’d wager they deserve to succeed in the Sciences even more than men because of the sexism and misogyny they experience.
They struggle to get in because they’re the minority, and a lot of people who could admit them are sexist (regardless of gender) because of the society they grew up in. Its not through any intellectual weakness. These women are amazing and just as smart as the men in their fields.
You have no right to say these things to these amazing women, many of whom I consider to be friends.
I think it’s just really important to me that Homestuck doesn’t have a straight man.
There’s no one in Homestuck whose role is to snark about how wacky everyone else is, to be the reader-insert character aloof from the shenanigans around them. And every time anyone tries to take on that role, it’s shown to be a self-destructive facade. Rose, Dave, Karkat, Equius, Eridan, Jane, Dirk… all of them attempt to be the “serious one”, but their character growth comes when they begin to move past their instinct to make fun of their friends (and, ultimately, themselves) for emotionally engaging with the world around them.
Homestuck has always been a comic about laughing with its characters, not at them. Where the conventionally unusual is celebrated, not derided. And that’s a worldview that is worth celebrating and defending.
As of this writing, John Green’s The Fault in Our Stars has sold over one million copies, and holds a place on several bestseller lists. The film adaptation of the book has made over two hundred million dollars in the domestic and foreign market. The book and the movie tell the story of two terminally ill American teenagers, and both contain a scene where the protagonists, Hazel and Augustus, share a kiss in the Anne Frank House. John Green made the following statement regarding the scene:
“Anne Frank was a pretty good example of a young person who ended up having the kind of heroic arc that Augustus wants—she was remembered and she left this mark that he thinks is valuable—but when he has to confront her death, he has to confront the reality that really she was robbed of the opportunity to live or die for something. She just died of illness like most people. And so I wanted him to go with a sort of expectation of her heroism and be sort of dashed.”
Here, Green makes it clear that he reads Anne Frank’s death as being from an illness like “most people,” like his protagonist. In doing so, he erases the circumstances under which she contracted typhus. “Most people” are not Ashkenazic Jewish teenage girls who contracted typhus in a concentration camp during the Holocaust. This fundamental erasure of the context of her death allowed him, those involved in the cinematic adaptation, and yes, a large portion of his readership, to accept the use of Anne Frank and her death as a prop in this American YA love story. Indeed, when further called on the issue, Green stated:
“I’ve been getting this question a lot. I can’t speak for the movie, obviously, as I didn’t make it, but as for the book: The Fault in Our Stars was the first non-documentary feature film to be granted access to the Anne Frank House precisely because the House’s board of directors and curators liked that scene in the novel a great deal. (A spokesperson recently said, ‘In the book it is a moving and sensitively handled scene.’) Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League and a Holocaust survivor, had this to say: ‘The kissing scene in ‘The Fault in Our Stars’ in the annex of the Anne Frank House is not offensive or against who Anne Frank was. What Anne communicated in her diary was hope. She celebrated life and she celebrated hope.’ Obviously, the Anne Frank House and the ADL do not have a monopoly on Anne’s life or her legacy, but their opinions are important to me.”
I take issue with this response. Here, Green is divesting himself of responsibility for the scene, and communicating to his critics that he is not to blame, because the Anne Frank House board of directors, curators, and a Holocaust survivor approved of it. In other words, he is drawing these peoples’ assumed authority to silence criticism, and to avoid taking responsibility for the filmed version of a scene he created.
The Anne Frank House, for all the wonderful work it does, is a museum. Like all museums, it must work to attract and reach out to potential patrons. In other words, museums have to advertise because they require patrons and revenues to exist. Therefore, I read the official approval of the Anne Frank House simply as a targeted attempt to reach out to and attract a pool of untapped, younger patrons. They chose to support the filming of a sympathetic romantic scene about terminally ill teenagers in their institution to reach out to young people. While that is a sound business decision, I would argue that it’s hardly an ethical one for the Anne Frank House, an institution devoted, as per their website, to:
“the preservation of the place where Anne Frank went into hiding during the Second World War, and to bringing the life story of Anne Frank to the attention of as many people as possible worldwide with the aim of raising awareness of the dangers of anti-Semitism, racism and discrimination and the importance of freedom, equal rights and democracy,”
to support the filming of this scene. For, in Green’s own words, that scene had nothing to do with the context of Anne Frank’s death, and therefore, it did nothing to bring Anne Frank’s story to life. And it hardly raises awareness of contemporary European anti-Semitism.
As for the ADL, I very much agree with Mr. Foxman’s assessment of Anne Frank. However, what she celebrated in her life and her writings have little to do with what she has come to mean in within public memory of the Holocaust of European Jewry. Her narrative has been used by nations and educational systems to the extent that for many, she is the Holocaust; she is the face of the Holocaust. But what we inherit from her isn’t the experience of the Holocaust. That experience, and her death at Bergen Belsen take place outside the pages of her diary. Readers are never forced to experience the Holocaust through her eyes; they are able to embrace the tragedy of the Holocaust through her story while remaining removed from its experiential realities. Thus, Anne Frank becomes the Holocaust without forcing anyone to experience it. Her name can be invoked to summon tragedy, without forcing anyone to feel it.
While Anne Frank may be the face of the Holocaust of European Jewry, the memory of the experiential reality of the Holocaust is male. The way we conceptualize and remember the concentration camp experience is constructed by male narratives. More Jewish men survived the Holocaust than Jewish women. Due to attitudes towards education in the interwar period, more male Jewish survivors had the education and literary capital needed to craft enduring narratives of their experiences than did female Jewish survivors. There are three foundational male Holocaust survival narratives: Night by Elie Wiesel, Survival in Auschwitz by Primo Levi, and Maus by Art Spiegelman about his father’s Holocaust experience. Never have I seen those three men and their narratives used as a joke, or a meme, or a cheap narrative device, or as self-promotion by an American pop star.
These men are revered, and their narratives taken extremely seriously. And none of them, none of them have been used in a prop in a story about terminally ill gentile American teenagers. They survived, in perhaps the type of heroic arc a John Green protagonist would yearn for. Yet Augustus doesn’t look to them. He doesn’t share a kiss with his girlfriend at Auschwitz. He shared a kiss with her in the Anne Frank House.
Anne Frank is not a prop. She is not a symbol, she is not a teenager who happened to die of an illness, and she is not one of the canonical Jewish male survivors. She is one of many millions of Jewish women and girls who were industrially murdered like livestock, incinerated, and left in an unmarked grave. That is the story of the Holocaust of European Jewry, and that is the story of the persecution and murder of all Europeans (the disabled, Romani, Irish Travelers, homosexuals, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Communists) who failed to fit into Nazi racial and ideological constructs.
And we would all do well to remember that.
If you choose to reblog, please reblog as text (link leads to visual guide of how to do so). Thank you!