thoodleoo: “we can’t call most histor
Mar. 24th, 2017 02:31 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
gravityeyelidsvia http://ift.tt/2nvtZTM:
thoodleoo:
“we can’t call most historical figures things like gay or lesbian because those terms didn’t exist in their times/cultures and if you ever call them that you’re a bad historian and/or just projecting”
“while it is important to be aware of the differences in how sexuality existed in other time periods and cultures, and using modern terminology is generally inappropriate in an academic setting, our terminology is still a convenient way to speak about historical figures who would likely have those identities in our own time. a historian should always be conscious of those differences, but that does not mean that it is wholly inappropriate to use our modern terminology in a casual setting for historical figures who had same-sex relationships, especially since, for many queer people, these historical figures can be a source of inspiration as well as a connection to the past”
(Your picture was not posted)
thoodleoo:
“we can’t call most historical figures things like gay or lesbian because those terms didn’t exist in their times/cultures and if you ever call them that you’re a bad historian and/or just projecting”
“while it is important to be aware of the differences in how sexuality existed in other time periods and cultures, and using modern terminology is generally inappropriate in an academic setting, our terminology is still a convenient way to speak about historical figures who would likely have those identities in our own time. a historian should always be conscious of those differences, but that does not mean that it is wholly inappropriate to use our modern terminology in a casual setting for historical figures who had same-sex relationships, especially since, for many queer people, these historical figures can be a source of inspiration as well as a connection to the past”
(Your picture was not posted)
