Yueqi Qi Fall 2025 Ready-To-Wear

Dress

c. 1880-1885

France

Musée des Arts Décoratifs

MARKGONG Fall 2025 Ready-To-Wear

TRAINA-NORELL MINK TRIMMED CHIFFON GOWN, 1948.

Long sleeve green silk with V-neck and back edged in brown mink, ruched midriff band and full skirt, neck having chiffon over nude insert and large cloth flower.

BIG TRANS RIGHTS UK TO DO LIST POST. PLEASE READ, DISSEMINATE, AND DO THE SHIT IN IT.

Trans Actual: We heard last week that the anti-trans lot write to Keir Starmer very regularly, some write at least once a week. And that’s all he’s hearing. He needs to hear from us. Write to him today, then put a note in your diary to write to him again next week, and the next...

Read our guide: buff.ly/4D2xGXs

@natacha.bsky.social

The best advice right now, from @janefae.bsky.social; If you're trans or non-binary, If you're a cis ally, If you oppose stripping an entire demographic of their human rights, Write; Use theyworkforyou.comcontact.no10.gov.uk Be polite, but WRITE. NOW.

Medium

Get writing!

Things you can do today to challenge the UK Government

Comedian @brainmage.bsky.social:

A bit rambly, but I think I got my point across. Cis folks! Write to your MP! It's real easy to do www.writetothem.com And important! Try to also ask specific things so you actually get a specific answer instead of a boilerplate one!

[TEXT:

Dear Fleur Anderson,

I am writing to you today to once again express concern at how trans rights are being eroded by the Labour government. I have previously written to you before about this (see case ref FA, FA &c.).

Today's letter is about the recent Supreme Court ruling which included in it a judgement about the definition of "women" under the Equality Act 2010.

This ruling is appalling. I am a cisgender man. I have trans friends and family, as I also have cis friends and family. The rhetoric whipped up around trans people is not a belief held by the vast majority of the UK population, and there is good evidence that it is pushed from extreme sectors of the American Evalgelical Christian right, who wish to use it as the thin end of the wedge to erode women's rights to contraceptive medications and abortions, as well as the rights of gay people to get married (see this piece in the Guardian, for example https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/09/us-religious-right-lgbtq-global-culture-fronts). Crucially, even were this not the thin end of a wedge, it would still be a cruel, harmful and unjustifiable attack on a minority group who are just trying to live their lives.

With regard to the ruling that trans women cannot use women's toilets, this ruling is both unenforcable, and will only result in more women, trans and cis, being attacked for not looking "sufficiently feminine". This will not protect anyone. I have a dear friend who is a cisgender woman who is over six feet tall. She has, since the "trans issue" has been pushed further into the national conversation, faced increasing holsility and fear when using toilets in public. My wife, who is also a cis woman and has previously had short hair and dressed in a gender non-conforming way, also been met with harassment when using toilets. I am not saying this to suggest that cis women's experiences are more important than trans women's - I also have many trans friends who have reported experiences of public transphobia - I am instead saying this to emphasis that, in spite of the anti-trans activists' insistance that they wish to "protect women", the results of their actions lead to exactly the opposite outcome.

All this ruling will do is empower people to harass women - both cis and trans - who are just going about their day.

The ruling is also unenforcable. Will there be an attendent checking the genitals of people using these bathrooms? If so, by what basis will they check? Will they check everyone, or only women deemed "insufficiently feminine"? If that is the case, please explain how this is anything other than a regressive, patriarchal step that will set back women's rights.

It has also been widely-reported the the Supreme Court did not consult with any transgender people in its ruling, but five dedicated anti-trans organisations were permitted to submit lengthy arguments. I find that staggering.

In summary, please directly address the following points in your reply:

1) Do you support this ruling? 2) Do you agree with Kier Starmer, whose spokesperson recently confirmed that he no longer agrees that trans women are women, and that trans women should use men's bathrooms? 3) If you do support the ruling, or agree with the Prime Minister that trans women should use men's bathrooms, please clearly state how this will be enforced, including the criteria that would deem a person insufficiently feminine, and therefore require intervention, as well as the scope of the intervention 4) If this ruling is upheld, and trans women cannot use female toilets, and feel unsafe in male toilets, where do you expect them to go when in public, given the relative infrequency of mixed-gender toilets? 5) If you do NOT support the ruling, what do you intend to do to push back against this, given your letter to me on December 15th 2023, case ref FA, where you said "I am a strong supporter of trans and LGBTQIA+ rights and I am disappointed that we still have such a long way to go. The safety, dignity, personal freedom and equal opportunity of all people is very important to me."?

I look forward to your reply.

Yours sincerely,

Guy Kelly

P.S. If you are a staffer reading, categorising, and responding to these on behalf of my MP, please think very carefully about the role you are playing, how can you can take an opportunity to stand up for and help protect a marginalised group, and do your part to be on the right side of history.

@nancymk.bsky.social‬

Want to contact your MP about the Supreme Court ruling?

@transsolidarity.bsky.social has created an MP letter template to help get you started:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/17g6X6jR2Xa6mPXY0hTib089xIdzmu5Y_2t6fVfHiDKQ/mobilebasic

if you're not either in the uk or from the uk, please feel free to just reblog. if you're bri'ish or resident here: get writing.

"But I've already written."

Girl (non-gender specific), the TERFs are writing every day. they have an uncontested field. Outweigh their bullshit. There's more of us than there are of them. Make it LOOK like that.

was talking to my mom about how white people ignore the contributions of poc to academia and I found myself saying the words "I bet those idiots think Louis Pasteur was the first to discover germ theory"

which admittedly sounded pretentious as fuck but I'm just so angry that so few people know about the academic advancements during the golden age of Islam.

Islamic doctors were washing their hands and equipment when Europeans were still shoving dirty ass hands into bullet wounds. ancient Indians were describing tiny organisms worsening illness that could travel from person to person before Greece and Rome even started theorizing that some illnesses could be transmitted

also, not related to germ theory, but during the golden age of Islam, they developed an early version of surgery on the cornea. as in the fucking eye. and they were successful

and what have white people contributed exactly?

please go research the golden age of Islamic academia. so many of us wouldn't be alive today if not for their discoveries

people ask sometimes how I can be proud to be Muslim. this is just one of many reasons

some sources to get you started:

PubMed Central (PMC)

Arabic Medicine in Literature

Google Books

A History of Medicine: Byzantine and Islamic medicine

but keep in mind, it wasn't just science and medicine! we contributed to literature and philosophy and mathematics and political theory and more!

maybe show us some damn respect

Beware!

this is kind of misleading I fear, (sorry for the long post) The final one would be part of the realism movement as it depicts manual labour in an un-glamourised fashion. The second could be baroque or romantic depending on the subject - baroque focused more on strong movement and lighting, romantic focused more on the representation of violence and strong emotions. The first /could/ be from the renaissance period but I'd be surprised. The angle and facial expression feel more romantic and the renaissance "leading lines" would have been defined by the scenery not by the subjects. As the background does not have strong, obvious perspective I'm gonna go with it not being from the renaissance period. An important thing to note is that there are multiple distinct styles/movements during the Renaissance period. The art during the Italian renaissance was defined by its references to the antiquity and by the mathematical approach to perspective. There were two Italian schools of thought when it came to painting. One prioritised use of colour (leaving a soft, almost blurry sensation). These were the modernists who considered that there needed to be more innovation in artwork. The others, the classicists prioritised shapes and references to the antiquity much more than the modernists. Finally the art of the Flemish Renaissance period prioritised symbolism and realism and had a much less mathematical approach to perspective. Flemish paintings of the period had an incredibly high level of detail. Examples of Baroque paintings: (please note that I have not studied this particular movement in depth - go do your own research about this movement too!)

Annibale Carracci, The Lamentation of Christ, c. 1604

Charles Lorrain, The Embarkation of the Queen of Sheba, 1648

Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, The Calling of Saint Matthew, c. 1599 Note how all of these paintings have religious themes and have a fixation with light and movement. Examples of Romantic paintings:

Theodore de Géricault, the Raft of the Medusa, 1818/1819 (this is the painting that started the romantic movement)

Eugène Delacroix, The Death of Sardanapulus, 1627 Note the fixation on violence and strong emotions as well as the more controversial subject matter - romantic paintings were often very badly received at the time. Examples of Renaissance paintings: Italian Renaissance period:

Raphael, The School of Athens, 1509 (note the very strong perspective in the scenery as well as the antiquity-inspired decor and subject)

Titian, The Venus of Urbino, 1538 Flemish Renaissance period:

Jan van Eyck, The Arnolfini Wedding, 1434 (take a moment to zoom around and try and pick up the symbolism... it's one of those works where you can spend hours trying to find all the hidden details the painter put in - also note the slightly wonky perspective)

Hubert and Jan Van Eyck ,The Ghent Altarpiece, completed in 1432 (this is an example of a polyptych, a common format for paintings during the larger Medieval Renaissance periods) Note the heavy concentration of symbolic imagery, the use of atmospheric perspective (which was also used in works during the Italian Renaissance), the more "realistic" representation and a use of more earthy tones Examples of Realistic paintings:

Gustave Courbet, A Burial at Ornans, 1849-1850

Jean-Francois Millet, The Gleaners, 1857 Note the representation of more prosaic subjects and a focus on manual labour.

I know this is going to make me sound pretensions but I have to get it off my chest. I feel an unimaginable rage when someone posts a photo and is like "this picture looks like a renaissance painting lol" when the photo clearly has the lighting, colors and composition of a baroque or romantic painting. There are differences in these styles and those differences are important and labeling every "classical" looking painting as renaissance is annoying and upsetting to me. And anytime I come across one of those posts I have to put down my phone and go take a walk because they make me so mad

Sir Terry Pratchett is a master of the written word but he ain’t shit for the way he trained me to accept dumb naming conventions because i got three missed calls on my phone from Scam Likely and I spent like half a day wondering who I knew named Scam. 

Janelle Monae at Met Gala 2025, in custom Thom Browne

Janelle Monae at the Afterparty

📢📢📢