ˈbil-duŋs-rō-ˌmän

Sandi Toksvig WILL ALWAYS AND FOREVER REBLOG THIS QUOTE

(via the-madame-hatter)

(via catladysoul)

I’m taking a class called The Archaeology of Sex and Gender (I’m an anthropology and art history major), and we were studying female figurines from the Neolithic era. Some girl in my class brought up the point that when male figurines with giant phalli were discovered, they were interpreted by academics as symbols of power. When female figures with giant vulvas were discovered, they were interpreted by academics as symbols of fertility. “Why can’t the giant vulva be a symbol of power too?” she asked.

It blew my mind and reaffirmed my decision to study anthropology and art history.

(via strugglingtobeheard)

Always seek knowledge

(via newwavefeminism, learninglog)

Always reblog. This is so awesome.

(via sanityscraps)

(via poptartslutzz)

(via your-nibs)

(via collectingapples) (via storybook)

Such a good quote.

(via edman)

This quote gives me chills every time I read it. Also, awesome story, strugglingtobeheard!

(via miss-education)

This reminds me of a conversation a friend and I had recently about our work. She’s in the very early stages of writing her dissertation on scribes in early medieval England, specifically female scribes. One of the things we vented about was the universal assumption that men copied the vast majority of manuscripts in the period, when there’s actually very, very little evidence to suggest that level of exclusivity. There are very few manuscripts we know for a fact were copied by men, and most are anonymous. And if you look at the nature of religious institutions in England and the status of women between 700-1000ish, 1.) quite a few monasteries were founded by aristocratic women; 2.) many were dual houses, which housed both male and female religious, and some of those houses were politically influential—and also headed by women—and thus were likely to have access to good libraries; 3.) there is evidence that women in important institutions were reading and writing correspondence in Latin; and 4.) there is also evidence that noble women were patrons of book production and literate themselves (in the vernacular if not in Latin), because wills from the period survive in which women bequeath their libraries to various people. None of this is concrete, but I don’t think it’s a leap to argue that it’s almost just as likely any given anonymous copyist could as easily be a woman as a man. But in manuscript studies, the assumption is always that, unless the text might have some “obvious” interest to women, the copyist is a man. Which is pretty damn ridiculous, and just another reminder that the effacement of women’s contributions to civilization and the transmission (and generation!) of knowledge is an ongoing process of willful forgetting, as well as ignorance.

(via dr-wtfox)

(via meatandsarcasm)

I can relate to the statues of women with giant reproductive parts being labeled as “degrading” or “fertility” when I thought it represented power.

Basically not everything revolves around 1950’s middle class/Victorian period gender roles people.

(via sandwichocracy)

(via zumie-monster)

(via innerwings)

(via sapphiremysteries)

(via windyafternoon)

and fertility is power too

(via chrryblssmninja)

i love this