thread started by last reply
We’re So Wonderfully Wonderfully Wonderfully Wonderfully Pretty! SharkCats! 2 replies | 650 views Stubby
20 hours 22 minutes ago
Stefan Stefan
5 minutes 39 seconds ago
Are Slowed-Down Songs in Movie Trailers Getting Played-Out? 28 replies | 1135 views ryancbritt
2 days 4 hours ago
13 minutes 13 seconds ago
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Rewatch: “Image in the Sand” 20 replies | 866 views krad
22 hours 22 minutes ago
crzydroid crzydroid
29 minutes 21 seconds ago
Never Wait for a Sequel Again: 17 Standalone Fantasy Novels 57 replies | 1860 views Stubby
1 day 3 hours ago
42 minutes 33 seconds ago
Words of Radiance Reread: Chapter 19 37 replies | 1462 views Wetlandernw
2 days 1 hour ago
Ways Ways
52 minutes 59 seconds ago
Morning Roundup: Lightning. Fire. The Power of God or... Something 2 replies | 755 views Stubby
1 day 5 hours ago
Mike Cugley
1 hour 11 minutes ago
A Read of Ice and Fire: A Dance with Dragons, Part 1 59 replies | 2130 views leighdb
2 days 22 minutes ago
1 hour 11 minutes ago
Night Shift Sweepstakes! 90 replies | 1010 views Sweepstakes
2 days 21 hours ago
crystal bostrom
1 hour 17 minutes ago
It’s a Hard Knock Life: Gotham, “Harvey Dent” 10 replies | 1433 views ThomDunn
3 days 21 hours ago
ChristopherLBennett ChristopherLBennett
2 hours 4 minutes ago
The Harbinger of Fun: Celebrating the Work of Glen A. Larson 10 replies | 1374 views ryancbritt
5 days 37 minutes ago
ryancbritt ryancbritt
2 hours 39 minutes ago
Could The Hunger Games Really Happen? 50 replies | 47320 views NancyLambert
2 years 7 months ago
3 hours 25 minutes ago
Superheroes Anonymous Sweepstakes! 78 replies | 600 views Sweepstakes
1 day 2 hours ago
Snowkestrel Snowkestrel
3 hours 37 minutes ago
We Are Family: Symbiont by Mira Grant 3 replies | 876 views niallalot
2 days 3 hours ago
niallalot niallalot
3 hours 45 minutes ago
Aliette de Bodard Shatters Paris 3 replies | 1052 views niallalot
2 days 2 minutes ago
niallalot niallalot
3 hours 51 minutes ago
Story: The Girl in the High Tower 1 reply | 5857 views Gennifer_Albin
1 month 1 week ago
M. Nelson
3 hours 55 minutes ago
Story: Nuestra Señora de la Esperanza 9 replies | 6386 views Carrie-Vaughn
1 month 1 week ago
M. Nelson
4 hours 18 minutes ago
Spoiler Thread for A Read of Ice and Fire, Part 6! 453 replies | 16673 views
3 months 4 weeks ago
Lyanna Mormont
4 hours 22 minutes ago
Story: This Chance Planet 27 replies | 8312 views matociquala
1 month 19 hours ago
M. Nelson
4 hours 24 minutes ago
Story: A Kiss with Teeth 15 replies | 7499 views MaxGladstone
3 weeks 3 days ago
M. Nelson
4 hours 40 minutes ago
Story: Shall We Gather 24 replies | 10587 views Alex_Bledsoe
1 year 6 months ago
5 hours 10 minutes ago
“How Guardians of the Galaxy Should Have Ended” is Even Sassier Than the Movie 4 replies | 1058 views Stubby
1 day 2 hours ago
amalmohtar amalmohtar
6 hours 10 minutes ago
Rereading Joe Abercrombie’s First Law Trilogy, Before They Are Hanged: “A Fitting Punishment” 1 reply | 696 views jdiddyesquire
1 day 22 minutes ago
DemetriosX DemetriosX
7 hours 31 minutes ago
The Harry Potter Reread: The Goblet of Fire, Chapters 3 and 4 55 replies | 1632 views EmilyAP
2 days 2 hours ago
DemetriosX DemetriosX
7 hours 35 minutes ago
Samsung Made a Butt Robot (Robutt? Ass-bot?) to Test Smartphones 3 replies | 1981 views Stubby
1 week 23 hours ago
7 hours 47 minutes ago
Advice to Aspiring Comic Book Creators 1 reply | 5591 views gene_luen_yang
4 months 1 week ago
Esteem Host
7 hours 54 minutes ago
Malazan Re-read of the Fallen: Deadhouse Gates, Chapters 14 and 15 77 replies | 17840 views ALRutter
3 years 9 months ago
Cassanne Cassanne
10 hours 6 minutes ago
Ticker Sweepstakes! 85 replies | 799 views Sweepstakes
1 day 19 hours ago
astrowolf astrowolf
10 hours 36 minutes ago
Rothfuss Reread: What Can We Learn From The Name of the Wind Playing Cards? (Part 3) 207 replies | 17556 views bluejo
6 months 1 week ago
12 hours 12 minutes ago
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Rewatch: Sixth Season Overview 37 replies | 2141 views krad
3 days 22 hours ago
krad krad
12 hours 35 minutes ago
I Want Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens to Get Rid of the Force 81 replies | 4920 views TorChris
1 week 3 days ago
Aeryl Aeryl
12 hours 45 minutes ago
BritMandelo's shoutbox
7 recent messages | show all
MatthewB MatthewB said (2 months ago):
Have you discussed or do you plan to discuss any of Jo Clayton's books in queering or post-binary gender? I started re-reading "Wild Magic" the other day and was reminded of how eye-opening and formative it was for me as a young white cis male suburban reader back in the late 80's, early 90's.
mp2014 mp2014 said (7 months ago):
beby4oo beby4oo said (3 years ago):
Hello !! I Hope you are in good health? Dear,i wish we could be friendly in good lovely relationship , if you could be sincere and lovely, well i do cherish your profile age and distance no problem, privately send me a reply to my email address ( while i get back at you including my picture. I shall hopefully wait for your reply. Yours, REBEKAH BABY THANKS
mrjennings mrjennings said (3 years ago):
Brit, I just conducted an interview of Richard Bowes that I thought might be of interest to you and the Queering SFF series. I've posted it here:
dianeduane dianeduane said (4 years ago):
Brit, apropos of nothing -- were you looking for copies of these? They're available as ebooks now. , ,
welovetea welovetea said (4 years ago):
Hey! I love this series of Queering SFF you're doing! Keep up the good work!
Longtimefan Longtimefan said (4 years ago):
I wrote something in a ranty moment and while I do not want to impose upon your time I value your opinion and want to share my quickly formed and perhaps not well finished words with you. It is long and you can just skip from here. :) An observation that may get my "gay" card revoked. Well several. Firstly, I am tired of the term "gay". It has too many meanings for too many people and it is only common because it is easier than saying "person (or people) interested in a relationship with someone of the same gender." It is important to use the word "relationship" and not the word "sex". While physical attention on many levels including (but not always guaranteed) the most intimate is part of a "relationship" it is not every minute of a relationship. Otherwise married people would never go to work. Physical intimacy is an action not a definition of who someone is. Those actions may be repeated with the same person for a long period of time (monogamy) they may be engaged in with a few or many people of the same gender leading many people to believe that they are "straight" or "gay". They may be actions shared with people of either gender leading people to become confused because both "straight" and "gay" social groups get really irritated if they cannot slap a label on it and stick it on the shelf. Shockingly, in my philosophical view, there are no "straight" or "gay" people. Heterosexual and homosexual describe actions not nouns. Because it is a mouthful to say "I am a person in a relationship with someone of the same gender." or "....of the opposite gender" the quick and lazy way to define people is by the occasional actions they take with people who are usually not in need of knowing that label. My boyfriend does not need to know I am "gay", other people do. Not that they need to know that any more than I need to know other people are "straight". However in the course of conversation, socialization and personal actualization people refer to the person they are having a relationship with. Instead of living in the logical moment and thinking "this person is in a relationship with this other person right now." social norms have developed short hand labels that build stereotypes like walls around every thing people think until it is a maze so complex that people forget it is there and just assume that they are just walking along a garden path instead of being penned in by a labyrinth not entirely of their own design. People are not their actions but they are constantly judged by them even if they chose to change them. I have dated women, I have dated men. I am currently dating a man. This does not make me "gay", this makes me a person in a relationship with someone of the same gender. So all of that was just to get to this. There is no "gay rights" movement. There is a movement for the equalization of value on relationships with people of the same gender. It seems like way too much to say but I thought of this when I realized this... The "gay rights" movement is not like the "civil rights" movement. It is similar too but still different from the "Suffragette movement" I can see where people would balk at that comparison because it links "gays" with "women" and that is already a false parallel that is difficult to break as a negative stereotype socially. However the point I would like to make is that when women were asking (well demanding) the vote it was because they wanted a relationship with government. They were subject to the laws, they were affected by the politicians, they were smart enough to know how they felt about those things. They could not say anything about it. Well, not legally in a way that would matter. Men who said women did not need to vote were not affected by women not voting. They did not have to live with the consequences of their actions. The women did. The thing is there are a lot of men who want women to like them. In the end to keep the affections of women they had to admit that they had the intelligence to vote and therefore should be allowed to vote. Still only 35 % of Americans vote and only half of those are women. Even if all of those were women that is not all of the women in America who can vote. Just because they can do something does not mean they will do something and when they do it does not make another persons vote less valid. (I am not getting into the "one vote cancels the other" argument. It is statistical not logical) There is not, however, the majority of the voting population interested in having people who want to be in relationships with someone of the same gender liking them. Many of them do not care. Not in a callous way (although there are those) but in a "it does not affect me so if I do not do anything about it it is no big deal" way. The people who do care have not done themselves any favors. They still place it in common social terms which as I said before have way to many definitions and do not clearly state what it is people are trying to accomplish. They have even started using the term "sexual minority". I loathe that term. It is many kinds of wrong that I will not expound upon here. It is not about getting our "10% quotas" in the work force or throwing off melaninistic segregation. It is about receiving the same social value on the relationship because two people want to be together. People are in relationships with people they care about. They share intellectual pursuits and social interests and moral foundations. Women wanted their vote, their opinion, to have the same weight socially as a man's. They did not stop being mothers or wives or workers or teachers. It changed what they could do and how they were perceived not who they were as people. People in same sex relationships want their relationship to have the same social weight as anyone else. They will still have the same jobs. They will still be relatives, they will still be friends. No opinion is perfect, no relationship is perfect but they should not be dismissed out of hand because it is socially acceptable to give them no merit in the first place.