Tag: okay but it doesnt say that they werent non cis so…

enigma-boi:

gayheu:

biggest-gaudiest-patronuses:

aphony-cree:

sp8b8:

class-isnt-the-only-oppression:

biggest-gaudiest-patronuses:

biggest-gaudiest-patronuses:

Happy Pride Month Eleanor Roosevelt was queer, the Little Mermaid is a gay love story, James Dean liked men, Emily Dickinson was a lesbian, Nikola Tesla was asexual, Freddie Mercury was bisexual & British Indian, and black trans women pioneered the gay rights movement.

Florence Nightingale was a lesbian, Leonardo da Vinci was gay, Michelangelo too, Jane Austen liked women, Hatshepsut was not cisgender, and Alexander the Great was a power bottom

Honestly just reblogging for that last one

Probably not historically backed but fuck yes

Eleanor Roosevelt wrote love letters to Lorena Hickok

Love letters Hans Christian Anderson wrote to Edvard Collin contain elements that appeared in The Little Mermaid, which he was writing at the same time

Several people who knew James Dean have talked about his relationships with men 

Letters and poems allude to a romance between Emily Dickinson and at least two women 

Nikola Tesla was adverse to touch. He said he fell in love with one women but never touched her and didn’t want to get married 

Freddie Mercury is well known for his attraction to men but was also linked to several women, including Barbara Valentin whom he lived with shortly before he died. Friends have talked about being invited into their bed and walking in on them having sex (documentary Freddie Mercury: The Great Pretender) 

Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera are two of the best-known activists who fought in the Stonewall riots

Florence Nightingale refused 4 marriage proposals and her letters and memoir suggest a love for women 

Leonardo da Vinci never married or fathered children, was once brought up on sodomy charges, and a sketch in one of his notebooks is 2 penises walking toward a hole labeled with the nickname of his apprentice 

Condivi said that Michelangelo often spoke exclusively of masculine love

Jane Austin never married and wrote about sharing a bed with women (Jane Austen At Home: A Biography by Lucy Worsley)

Hatshepsut took the male title Pharaoh (instead of Queen Regent) and is depicted in art from the time the same way a male Pharaoh would have been

“Alexander was only defeated once…and that was by Hephaestion’s thighs.” is a 2,000 year old quote

I want to hire you to follow me around and defend my honor with meticulous research

Gonna add some more to the list: 

  • Donatello, renaissance artist, likely gay (Hey, let’s face it— 3/4s of the TMNT were gay). [source 1] [source 2] [source 3]
  • Baron Von Steuben, a gay man who helped train George Washington’s troops at Valley Forge. [source 1] [source 2] [source 3]
  • Julius Caesar, a military leader and popular Roman politician who was also a bottom (I mean if he wasn’t a bottom, why else would he have gotten stabbed 23 times?). [source 1] [source 2] [source 3 — a note: this is just stating that the trouble wasn’t the gender of the other person, it was because [Caesar] was the bottom]

(PS. On Freddie Mercury, he was Parsi— Indian + Iranian.)

Okay, as someone who’s studied Egyptology a lil more extensively than the average folk, the Hatshepsut thing is not what you think it is. Even though from someone on the outside looking in it would seem like that. 

I can’t speak for anyone else mentioned here, but calling Hatshepsut “non cisgender” does show the potential dangers of projecting modern ideas of gender and sexuality onto ancient figures who’s conception and presentation of gender/sexuality would be vastly different to today’s due to time, place and societal expectations and standards.

TL;DR Hatshepsut wasn’t “non-cisgender” because the few texts that mention her in the masculine and depict her in the masculine literally do so because in the texts where she is mentioned in the masculine the grammatical structure of the language just would not allow for her to be mentioned in the feminine at all, and all art depicting her in the masculine was – again – political in nature (as pretty much all royal art was). 95% of the texts about her refer to her in the feminine and her burial ritual was also in the feminine.

Unless some new evidence arises to point her as a potential LGBT+ individual, calling her “definitely not cisgender” speaks to both the potential downsides of projecting that onto a historical figure because it’s applying modern ideas of gender presentation, gender roles and gender assumption on to peoples who would have had such a vastly different one from today’s.