Can we talk about the fact that Diana ALREADY has kiss marks on her face
Like she’s not rolling her eyes at Harley wanting to smooch her she’s rolling her eyes at the fact that this ridiculous bisexual ball of sugar won’t stop smooching her
He was a lot like Achilles- he had just one weakness. Except instead of his heel, it was his groin. You may have heard of “Achilles’ heel”, but have you heard of “Bophades’ Nuts”?
This is the best joke on this godforsaken website.
Scenes showing two women together are rare, but this first century oil lamp from Roman Turkey shows two women having oral sex together on a couch. While sex was frequently shown on everyday domestic items, it is uncertain who would have used or seen this lamp. It may have been made to titillate male viewers, rather than to appeal to women.
This is Roman!
It was Roman custom to greet companions with a kiss on the cheek or mouth, as a result, oral sex was the most taboo sexual act, because nobody wants to go in for a polite greeting and get a face full of dick breath.
I disagree that this was intended to titillate men for a few reasons:
These lamps are small, portable, and relatively replaceable/disposable. They cover scenes from daily life with no exceptions.
There was a HUGE slave trade in the Roman empire. Selecting slaves for domestic and sexual labour was completely normalised and there is no reason or evidence that women didn’t participate.
Classics over-relies on Martial’s nutty MRA epigrams because they’re the only references to lesbians we have. Counterpoint: they’re the only references to wlw that we have because bisexuality (as the modern world would define it) was the norm for Ancient Rome, and nobody else thought women having sex with other women (instead of them) was a problem.
The Romans considered women the seat of sexual desire. It was impossible for a woman to control her raging lust, and a man’s noble duty to resist spilling his manly essence unnecessarily, lest he end up a ridiculous, emasculated brute like Hercules.
[IMAGE: a flow chart to review when considering getting into a fight on the internet. I’m not sure how to best transcribe a flow chart but basically it goes:
“should I get into a fight on the internet????”
“NO”
“ah you’re right” (branch ends here) or “ok but….. that sounds fake….”
“LOOK. WHO SAID THE WRONG THING?”
“someone I love + care about”
“WAIT A FEW HRS. THEN SEND A PRIVATE MESSAGE IF IT’S STILL BOTHERING YOU. A KIND MESSAGE.” (branch ends here)
“some jerk idk” or “friend of a friend”
“IGNORE IT”
“BUT IT’S SO OFFENSIVE!!!”
“IGNORE IT”
“ B U T ”
(all the way back up to the original answer) “NO”]
for my own reference, other possible retorts to “ignore it” that would also lead back to “ignore it” are: – but I’ve seen a whole bunch of posts saying this wrong thing recently and i’m sick of it – but this person approached ME to start a fight about the thing – I’m having a bad day
I keep getting back to “ok but….. that sounds fake….”
the term “edgelord” implies the existence of an entire hierarchical structure of edgenobility. there ought to be like, edgedukes and edgeviscounts running around. edgesquires. edgecomtessas.
Edgemarquis
Hah!
Historically, the distinction between a count and a marquis is that a marquis’ domain lies at the border of the kingdom, and is thus more likely to be attacked by hostile forces. This position of elevated trust is why a marquis traditionally outranks a count.
Now, the domain of a marquis is called a “march”, derived from the Old French marche (”border, boundary”), and ultimately from the Proto-Indo-European mereg, which translates as… “edge”.
A marquis, then, is a literal edge-lord; i.e., lord of an “edge”, or border domain.
We must therefore conclude that an edgemarquis is twice as edgy as other edgelords.
I just love the myth of Persephone, i mean the real, original version of it, because it’s not like she got kidnapped, no, this bitch was la-de-da-ing in a meadow and she just happened to find an entrance to the Underworld and she was like “Imma check this out”. And she just wanders into the Underworld and discovers that hey this place ain’t too bad.
Meanwhile Hades is in the background “????? UM??? PRETTY GIRL??? WHY ARE YOU HERE?????? YOU AREN’T DEAD???”
And Persephone (who was originally called Kore just a little fyi) just looked at him and said “I like it here. I’m staying.”
And Hades kinda just went with it, until Demeter started throwing the temper tantrum of the millenium upstairs and Zeus had to intervene because this shit was getting out of hand and its actually his job to be admistrator of justice. Which considering the shit he gets up to is kinda histerical but that’s another story there.
And basically Persephone wasn’t a prisoner or kidnap victim at all she just really loved the Underworld and her (eventual) husband, and the Greeks feared her arguably more than her husband because Hades could be reasoned with but Persephone was the one laying the smack down on sinners, and really, who wouldn’t be at least a little scared of someone who’s name means something along the lines of “the destroyer”
Basically, Persephone is amazing and everbody needs to get on her level
@teashoesandhair, is this true and right and accurate? I ask you because you are The Knowing when it comes to things of this nature…
*sweats nervously* no, this is not true and right and accurate.
(Edit 2: tbh any post that says THIS IS THE ORIGINAL MYTH is going to be wank, because we don’t know what the original myth was – we only have the first written sources, but without a time machine there’s just no way of finding out how the myth developed in an oral tradition)
The first source we have for Persephone being carried away is in Hesiod’s Theogony, written in the 8th or 7th century BC. We also have the Homeric Hymn to Demeter, written in the 7th or 6th century BC, which is explicitly about her being taken away by Hades.
Hesiod is one of the oldest Greek sources that we have, roughly contemporaneous with Homer. We don’t have any earlier sources than this which say ‘hey, Persephone went to Hades because she thought it would be cool’. A lot of people have theorised that this could have been an original, or at least an earlier tradition, but it’s about 60% wishful thinking, 20% misinterpreting evidence (i.e. assuming that Persephone and Demeter used to be aspects of a great mother goddess, which they weren’t) and about 20% conjecture based on actual rational thought (i.e. the fact that the oldest written source we have is about an abduction doesn’t mean that it is the original source; there could be older non-extant written sources or just oral tales which pre-dated writing). It’s not fact.
It’s true that Homer himself never explicitly says that Persephone was abducted (he just describes her as Hades’ wife) but he also doesn’t say that she wasn’t abducted; it could well be that the myth of her abduction was so well known that he had no need to recount it.
It is true that Persephone’s name was Kore, which means ‘maiden’; however, this could be an epithet because she was unmarried. (Edit 3: it’s also theorised that it was a euphemism of sorts for when people didn’t want to name Persephone outright; again, this is a theory). The name ‘Persephone’ does not mean death / destroyer; the etymology is unknown (the ‘death / destroyer’ theory is just one of many, and others are based around ideas of harvest and grain).
The reason Zeus got involved wasn’t just because he was tasked with sorting out justice – it was because he had told Hades ‘hey, you want a wife? Cool! Abduct my daughter, Persephone. Her mum totally won’t mind,’ and then when Persephone’s mother did mind, Zeus was like ‘I fucked up real bad, I should sort this shit out.’ Edit 4 – in Ancient Greece, women didn’t have to consent in the same way as we do now. Abduction marriages were actually illegal (or at least very very naughty) but the bride’s consent basically took the form of her father saying ‘you’ll marry this dude, right? Yeah, cool. She’ll marry you, dude.’ Here, Zeus gives Persephone’s consent to Hades by telling Hades that he can marry her – this is why technically she wasn’t exactly abducted, because the necessary consent – her father’s – was given. HOWEVER, let’s not get into Greek law here. She was abducted by our standards.
It is also true that Persephone became a very feared goddess and basically had a great time in the Underworld. She wasn’t exactly more terrible than Hades, though; there are certain myths (e.g. Sisyphus and Orpheus) where she’s the one who says ‘Hades, babe, shall we give this guy a chance to make his way out of the Underworld alive?’ HOWEVER, she did usually do this with the implementation of specific terms, meaning that she had a level of control in proceedings which a lot of other wife goddesses didn’t have over their respective spouses’ spheres. Most mythological canons also give her and Hades a very healthy and monogamous relationship (with the exception of Orphism, which is a bit more iffy on that front) so, disregarding the abduction part of her myth, their marriage was really relatively healthy, even by modern standards. (Edit 5: also, Persephone did not ‘lay the smack down on sinners’ – the whole idea of sinners is basically a Christian concept. The Underworld was not Hell. It wasn’t a place for bad people. It was just where the dead went. Tartarus was the place where the really bad guys went to be tortured and shit, and is more indicative of Christian notions of Hell. People weren’t punished in the Underworld. They just went there.)
I love the idea of Persephone as a consenting wife of Hades. I am a fan of modern reinterpretations in which she chooses to eat the pomegranate seeds willingly, or where she falls in love with Hades and goes to the Underworld of her own accord. However, these are modern interpretations, based on modern gender politics and ideas of reclamation and representation. I will forever fight for people’s right to reinterpret myths however they like, but this whole idea of the ‘original myth’ of Persephone being devoid of any misogynistic undertones really needs to die.
(Edit 1: putting my tags here in case anyone thinks I’m just a hideous puritan:
#i love all the myriad interpretations where she actually has agency #but she didn’t in any of the oldest original sources that we currently have #and i don’t like people saying that she did #because it negates all the misogynistic bullshit that women have been subjected to #and i don’t think it should be negated
I should also point out that I’m doing my MA dissertation partly on the modern feminist reclamation of patriarchal myths, including the erroneous claims that these myths were originally matriarchal, so this post definitely counts as work and I’m 100% not procrastinating… sort of…)
Every time I see this post without @teashoesandhair’s contribution I feel compelled to hunt it down again
Kimchi and Justice 