Im so glad Jezebel is beyond perpetuating harmful body stereotypes about groups of people. They are real champions of equality.
Fuck it, I’ll say it
Feminists > MRAs
Why does using one label over the other make you a joke? Do you not believe that gender stereotypes harm everyone involved?
- hollywood actress has privately shared nude photos published without consent: seen as victim, gets free publicity and even more popular support
- male politician has privately shared nude photos published without consent: made to resign from life's career, publicly mocked as stupid and has naked body laughed at on television
alittledashofwisdom said: I'm genuinely loving the responses to the lyrics you posted from the Jessie J, Ariana Grande and Nicki Minaj song bang bang. It's amazing how everyone reacts when they think it's a man that sang it. Thank you for the smiles, and if you didn't do it sarcastically, then you know the song and artist is not actually Robin Thicke.
Me too, people on this website really do hate to fact check
pootpolice said: you actually seem like a pretty cool person/feminist/egalitarian/mra/whatever label you want because not only do you fight feminist's problematic views, but ive also seen you fight mra's/society's problematic views. and your arguments aren't just a bunch of insults thrown at a person, they're logical and calm. you deserve a follow and a bunch more of 'em.
Thank you :)
Wow that’s just awful.
I love it when they make it so obvious
THIS is exactly the kind of thing I have a problem with
"we just want EQUALITY" except of course when you don’t want it, and we’re supposed to just ignore that…
Robin Thicke’s new song is disgusting
I will reblog this every time.
As if that statistic couldn’t be a function of sex differences when it comes to interest. Boys and girls in the fourth are much more similar than men and women in college. Women hold the majority in education, psychology,social work etc In any case women are already earning a majority of degrees in every other field so why is them earning less degress in this case an issue ?Also this… whatever this is… just strikes me as so insulting towards girls and so dismissive of girls’ agency and ability to make decisions. Firstly, so what if her parents told her not to look at a few crabs when she was younger? If she had any real aptitude for science it would likely be reflected in her grades at school and she’d get encouragement from her teachers instead- and even if she didn’t, getting good grades is generally motivation enough to pursue something. And as for the final gif, showing her applying lipstick and ignoring the poster… So what? What are they trying to say? That this girl (and therefore, millions of real life girls like her) are making the “wrong” choice, that they’ve failed somehow? So she doesn’t want to into a career that requires nearly ten years of training before you can even properly begin to be qualified, where even at the height of your career you’re likely to earn pittance (or else, like in the US, be subject to a culture of cutthroat competition and drudgery that whatever you earn will hardly seem worth it, like people have to lock their fume hoods so people in their own lab won’t sabotage their results, is that the kind of environment you’d want to work in?), where every step you take up the career ladder is a step out of the lab and further into tedious bureaucracy, where, if you want any hope of being successful, you have to sacrifice basically all your time and energy and even then likely see very little returns… But no, no, STEM subjects are “glamourous”, so clearly the vast majority of women are stupid, make-up obsessed airheads for rejecting them. Of course.
It’s also a very misleading use of statistics. If it was “66% of the fourth-graders interested in STEM subjects are female, but women only make up 18% of STEM undergraduates”, that would be an accurate comparison. If it was “66% of fourth-grade girls enjoy engineering, but only 18% of women major in engineering at college”, that would be a fair thing to contrast.
Of course, it still wouldn’t be shocking that the number had decreased, because not everybody does a degree in every subject they thought was fun at elementary school. I would have said I like science, maths, English, geography, history, IT and so on, because you’re not taught philosophy, politics and economics at that level, but people’s horizons expand and they’re interested in new things. Even if they keep the same interests, and I do still like science and maths, they can’t follow all of them! People don’t just have one interest that they follow for the rest of their lives; they can keep one whilst furthering another.
It would still be a silly point to make, but at least we’d be talking in the same terms.
As it is, we’re comparing the extremely broad “science and maths” to the very specific “majoring in engineering”. Why not use the percentage of all STEM university students? It makes it look like they’ve cherry-picked the one course which has the most shocking numbers. We’re comparing “percentage of females who are scientific” to “percentage of scientist who are female”, as if that makes any sense at all. In a world where 100% of fourth-grade boys and girls said they liked science, we still wouldn’t have 100% of science students being boys and 100% of science students being girls. The two figures don’t translate into each other at all, and it is dishonest to contrast them like this.
That’s just the start. As poorpoorpitifulme points out, it gets even more patronising from then on.
If you look hard enough, and squint your brain, you can see oppression everywhere!
LOOK AT HOW WELL THIS IS SOURCED
That aside I need to double check this because I can almost guarentee this is a statistic that has been taken out of context and spun, I WILL REPORT BACK WITH THE NEWS
Also twice the non reciprocal means that women fight back to their abusers and men don’t
It doesn’t mean that women are committing twice the amount of harm
Here, have 286 sources. Happy now?
No? Have 1700 then.
1700 sources. Wow.
Maybe the women are defending themselves. And the MALE convinces the MALE judge that he’s innocent. But everyone knows that he’s not.
Maybe your so desperate to paint women as weak, helpless and pathetic victims that you see an almost equal stat and think that every single male victim is actually lying to cover up his abuse and that male judges are in on it because it’s actually a conspiracy of men oppressing women.
Female judges are generally harsher on female criminals while male judges are harsher on male criminals. Men are treated more harshly across the board. For the exact same crime men are more likely to be arrested, more likely to be charged, more likely to be found guilty, more likely to be sentenced, are sentenced to 63% more prison time on average. Male prisoners also account for more than half of all rape victims. Women are more likely to get a suspended sentence or let off completely. Baroness Hale, a feminist, enforced a sentencing discount for female criminals, they’re also trying to close women’s prisons, citing the things that go on there as their reasons despite the fact that the same exact things go on in men’s prisons (only with nothing done about it). Such as “women are being raped” skimming over “by other women”, the same people who justify the erasure of male prison rape because they’re being raped by other men. Showing an inhuman lack of basic empathy. No pro-male bias here.
I grew up with an abusive mother, watching our dad and later, her boyfriends subjected to everything from verbal abuse to physical and even sexual violence. We even walked in on her once with an unconscious man, we saw what it did to those men, many of whom are now dead. She never once even got arrested, she’d turn on the tears and claim it was all him. She could talk about it openly and people wouldn’t even see it as wrong. She also crashed into a petrol station while 3 times over the limit and merely lost her licence and had to do some course and that was it. You can see why women wouldn’t get in as much trouble. Not exactly pro-male here either.
My brother in law was imprisoned for a supposedly non-prisonable offence, his excellent reputation and military service was seen as more reason to send him down. Within his first few days he was attacked by a group of guys and nearly gang raped, he fought his way out of that, luckily. Victimisation of men in UK prisons isn’t even counted, if they report it they’re put in isolation and nothing happens to the rapist. No pro-male anything there.
Men do not get a free pass, they can’t just turn on the tears and say they were on their period, they can’t expect judges to decide that the child they raped was just too tempting and it’s all the kid’s fault, they wouldn’t get just 2 years for repeatedly raping an 8 year old, no one cares.
Almost forgot the Duluth model, predominant aggressor and mandatory arrest laws which were put in place because they found that being objective led to “too many” women being arrested for domestic abuse. So now when a man, bloody and bruised, calls about an abusive partner, he is the one arrested. And if he calls a DV hotline, he gets laughed at, shouted at, blamed or referred to a batterers hotline. This also means that abusive women have a lot of difficulty finding help, therapists (mostly taught by feminist professors coincidentally enough) who believe in the Duluth model will even excuse them, say it’s the men’s fault for annoying her and asking what he did to deserve it.
Thank you feminism.
Vice.Com can go fuck themselves.
Read the article yourself->: Note the explicit absence of the word rape.
THEY ACTUALLY MADE UP NEW WORDS TO DESCRIBE SEX SO THEY WOULDN’T HAVE TO USE THE WORD RAPE TO DESCRIBE WHAT A WOMAN DOES TO A BOY.
Fuck everything about these people.
SYABM #comic 07 “U.N.-acceptable”
I have a few problems with Emma Watson’s speech at the UN, what I’ve seen of it. (Thanks, shoddy internet connection!)
- It was on behalf of an organization called “HeForShe”. Their website says men should pledge take action to address violence and discrimination “faced by women and girls”. Nothing about men.
- If the idea is to help men so they stop harming women, does that mean that once women’s problems are fixed, they’ll stop? What about the men’s problems that are about harming other men, aka “most violence”? For that matter, why is “helping men for women’s sake” the presentation here, when feminism regularly helps women for women’s sake alone?
- I’ve seen example after example of feminists claiming to fight for men’s problems, but what they actually meant was “we want to fix men so they can be free from their gender roles of hurting women”. What’s odd is that they never seem to square this with the fact that hurting women, at least in the West, is something men are Not Supposed to Do under almost any circumstances. Men are, in fact, supposed to protect women, even with their lives.
This has lead to some feminists - well, one critic in particular - doing logical contortions to explain how Damsel In Distress narratives actually promote Violence Against Women by presenting the woman in question as just an object to be retrieved. Not an actual person whose safety is the male hero’s concern. Just an object, like an ash tray or a coffee mug. With boobs. Because men risking their lives for a stapler is commonly viewed as brave and heroic, just like it is when they risk their lives for women!
- What happened to all the feminists who keep insisting men don’t have any significant problems? Are they protesting this video? Why do these things tend to focus on things like social gender roles, and not, say, institutionalized discrimination in the legal system, such as the child support racket and lack of recognition and resources for male rape and abuse victims?
- Emma mentions being called bossy at age 8. My 7-year old neice is staying over with us right now, and she is bossy. She’s an intelligent, willful little girl who acts like she’s 35, who regularly ignores commands from adults and occasionally tries to issue them. I literally had to hold her in a bear hug during a church service to keep her from skylarking. And it’s not like it’s uncommon for kids to think that they’re the center of the universe.
- The best way to prevent people from viewing feminists as misandric would be to actually prevent misandric feminists from using the name of the movement. Kick them out of the treehouse. Point at the Slate article defending “male tears” and go “this is sexist”. Make it absolutely clear that “ironic” sexism against men is not okay, even when other feminists do it. For some reason, most feminists prefer to disavow them defensively, not actively, and they seem more concerned with trying to get people to stop counting the problematic ones as feminists than with keeping the misandrists from calling themselves feminists, or correcting whatever led them to think they were feminists.
- Talk is cheap. No feminist I’ve ever asked can name a single major feminist program or initiative mainly to address men’s issues. And for some reason, talks like this tend to ignore the existence of people who have been trying to talk about men’s issues for decades now, which feminism has gone through a great deal of effort to silence. As in, breaking the law, in real life, or mocking with “male tears” and actively trying discredit the term “misandry”. MRA, egalitarian, feminist, non-aligned, male, female, non-binary, it doesn’t really matter.
- Emma treats “gender equality" and "fighting for women’s rights" and "feminism" as synonymous, which is certainly not the case. You can be for gender equality without being a feminist, for women’s rights without being a feminist or for gender equality, and a feminist without wanting gender equality, and may in fact be contributing to the erasure of F-F rape and abuse victims by treating those crimes as things only men do.
Heck, I’ve seen pro-feminist folks use sexist insults against women when they don’t toe the party line, and Women Against Feminism and other female critics of feminism get death threats. Apparently, women don’t deserve their own choices when they contradict the Sisterhood. It’s not uncommon for feminists to conveniently forget male feminists even exist.
- The UN itself has spent a lot of effort addressing “violence against women”, sometimes using “logic” much like you’d expect to find on Tumblr. In fact, they’ve explicitly treated wartime sexual “gender-based” violence as something that only happens to women and girls.
Conclusion: Would I like it if feminism did more to work on men’s issues? Sure, but -
Sorry, Emma Watson, but HeForShe Is Rotten for Men - Cathy Young for TIME
In Re: Emma Watson’s Unspeech - The Justicar (NSFW) Disclaimer: I only watched to 12:30 or so, and don’t agree with all of his points.
Speaking of Tinder hypocrisy between men not liking fat women and women not liking short guys so don’t give me this whole, “oh society” bullshit that paints men exclusively as shallow assholes
Anonymous said: While I do love Harry Potter, I'm reading the sixth book and it drives me crazy that Merope Gaunt is made into a tragic victim. She was abused by her father, never experienced love, and those things are sad. But I draw the line where, in the book, Tom Riddle Senior is repeatedly described as having "abandoned her". She slipped him a love potion. Leaving the person who drugged you and forced you to marry them and have sex with them isn't "abandoning your wife" it's fleeing from your rapist.
Yeah, she was a victim right up until she fucking kidnapped someone and forced them to impregnate and marry her.
Reminds me of a post I saw on love potions, a series of PSA type things on date rape for the wizarding world, of course from a feminist perspective. Don’t be THAT wizard.
When someone pointed out that the characters who had used it for that purpose were all women, some other feminist wrote a long tirade about how it’s different because men would just drug the women into bed while women just want to be loved by men who don’t deserve her.
Some of the fans’ defences of characters like Romilda Vane (who tried to drug Harry but got Ron instead) and Becky from Supernatural is really disturbing, especially when they see a man asking more than once as “rapey” and “entitled”.
a4059425 said: It's strange how many short men are un-shorted in media. Yukio Mishima was 5'1", yet played in Four Chapters by the 5'8" Ken Ogata. T.E. Lawerence was 5'5", yet played by the 6'2" Peter o'Toole. I guess "one of the greatest writers ever," and "scholar and warrior" doesn't fit with "manlet". Winston Churchill was "only" 5'5" as well, also from WW2 is Audie Murphey who was 5'4", and is known as the real Captain America (a short man, who only becomes desirable after becoming taller.).