Video 23 Jul 34,773 notes

voxclara:

savanna:

roman-numerals:

yiffstrider:

amporeon:

terraparticle:

amporeon:

IMPORTANT: So they had these cards in the women’s restrooms at this doctor’s office that I was at. I’m really happy that they put them in there because it makes it easier for a woman to escape an abusive relationship without the abuser expecting anything. It gives me hope when I see things like this.

Oh yes, because women are never abusers.

I never said that they can’t/ aren’t. I’m well aware that some women are. I was just trying to talk about a positive thing that I found in a restroom. Don’t turn my post into something that it’s not. God fucking damn it, it’s like you can’t talk about something positive on this site without someone trying to ruin it or twist the original posters words.

Thank you so much for the positive post, and the VERY true words at the asshole commenting on your post. This is the exact reason why I don’t like this website sometimes. Christ.

If you have to qualify Situation A with “but Situation B happens, too,” do you actually give a shit about Situation B? Or are you looking for ways to derail Situation A?

^

40% of domestic violence is experienced by men, do you suppose they also put these cards in the men’s restroom?

Wouldn’t seeing these cards in the restroom alert abusers that there were probably the same cards in the other gender restroom, possibly making them more violent and cutting off their partner even more from resources that could help them?

This seems ill thought out. Unless, of course, they are only in the women’s restroom. In which case they are ignoring 40% of domestic violence victims. I wonder why.

I honestly didn’t feel like this was derailing at all. I didn’t see the first reply as saying “men get abused too”, or even mentioning men at all. I thought that they were talking about women being abused by women, questioning the specific line “without the abuser expecting anything”. If it’s a woman-woman relationship, the abuser might well see the cards and get paranoid, leading to more abuse in the long run.

The conversation later did get derailed to become about men, but I don’t think anyone should have assumed that from the start. Not every abuser is male, and not every relationship is male-female.

Text 22 Jul 68 notes

pointyearedbastard said: Do you not understand the difference between insulting a woman's appearance and insulting a man's appearance? We live in a society where women are raised to hate the way they look while they're simultaneously being fed the idea that their appearance is the only thing they have to offer. Men are raised to first be valued for their accomplishments, looks are secondary. Harmless jokes aimed at this ridiculous power structure do not mean the same thing when "inverted". Don't be a pissbaby.

aceattorneysforsocialjustice:

adhoption:

I’m not the one getting angry buddy

image

Sexism is a two way street. Men are raised the same exact way you know. They’re constantly told that they must be muscular, but not over the top muscular get a 6 pack and have a big piece of genitalia. Appearance is important in our culture. Do I agree with it being held to such a damn high regard? No, because it’s toxic. But we can’t just flat out ignore half of the victims of it either and literally spit in their face. Those jokes aren’t harmless, sexist jokes are never harmless.
If you want to promote body positivity, that’s fantastic! But pushing down half of the population while doing it makes your entire point moot. If the inverted post makes you upset, you should imagine that a male probably thought the same way of the original post- because trust me it happens.

Not every man is body conscious, but a good number of us are: we just aren’t encouraged to express our low self-esteem as much as women are, instead told to keep our problems to ourselves. Society holds up a female beauty ideal, that a women’s body should be a work of art, and this leads to low self-esteem in women who can’t live up to these impossible standards. Men, on the other hand, have traditionally been told that our bodies are ugly, fat, hairy, sweaty, utilitarian lumps just there to do women’s heavy lifting and definitely not to look at. Image-conscious men have a lot to be upset about.

But men are getting more and more objectified recently, to the extent where we now have almost as much as women to live up to. Every man you ever see topless, in adverts or films, is a muscular hulk. If “skinny” is unrealistic for women, these degree of devoted body sculpting is unrealistic for men. Accordingly, men are getting more and more body-conscious, with a decent number of them developing eating disorders (I’m also convinced that living in the gym to stop hating your body is a disorder in itself).

As it is, for whichever reason, men have body image issues. Jokes aren’t harmless, any more than they would be the other way around. You might be somehow immune to social pressures, which is great for you, but please don’t assume that everybody else shares that privilege. Show some respect to the people who don’t.

Video 21 Jul 321 notes

sjwstupidity:

commanderabutt:

idislikecispeople:

Nice going, , you did good altering my original post to make me look like a trans/misogynist when in reality I’m just a transmisandrist lmfao. You did good, you edgeless cube. I found a friend for you.

image

idislikecispeople is unable to understand the concept behind invertedgender pass it on

u made me look like a bigot when in reality i’m just a bigot

Photo 21 Jul 692 notes anti-feminism-pro-equality:

I love this picture to death because its the ultimate proof of equality. We make fun of EVERYONE not just men not just women!

It’s not really though, is it? If you mock women for something our society says men should do, and men for something society says that women should do, you’re just enforcing gender roles onto both groups. That’s not progressive or different, that’s something that almost every bit of sexism does. Doing them both at once is no better than different people doing them separately; you still perpetuate harmful stereotypes.
Equality would be mocking men and women for the exact same things, because you acknowledge that we are all human and our gender doesn’t decide what we can and can’t do. There’s a big difference between equal treatment and an equal level of treatment. Forcing women to stay in the home and forcing men to support their whole family alone sucks for both groups, so it’s a similar level of negative treatment, but you’re a fool if you’d call that equality.

anti-feminism-pro-equality:

I love this picture to death because its the ultimate proof of equality. We make fun of EVERYONE not just men not just women!

It’s not really though, is it? If you mock women for something our society says men should do, and men for something society says that women should do, you’re just enforcing gender roles onto both groups. That’s not progressive or different, that’s something that almost every bit of sexism does. Doing them both at once is no better than different people doing them separately; you still perpetuate harmful stereotypes.

Equality would be mocking men and women for the exact same things, because you acknowledge that we are all human and our gender doesn’t decide what we can and can’t do. There’s a big difference between equal treatment and an equal level of treatment. Forcing women to stay in the home and forcing men to support their whole family alone sucks for both groups, so it’s a similar level of negative treatment, but you’re a fool if you’d call that equality.

Photo 19 Jul 93,040 notes thefapcontroller:

siryouarebeingmocked:

dickardcain:

ihateeverythingyoulove:

mysoulburns:

THANK YOU

Are you kidding me? He got WAY more shit than she has ever gotten. AND HIS SONG WASNT EVEN ABOUT RAPE.

I love how Taylor Swift is raised up as this icon of “feminist” values… When she routinely slut shames other women, puts other women down, she makes revenge songs routinely and epitomizes some of the common stereotypes of “toxic femininity”.  Not that many feminists would be willing to admit those exist.Note: I only support the idea of toxic femininity if someone is also speaking of toxic masculinity. I think both men and women have “toxic” personality traits and they can often overlap. 

Remember, a song about a man trying to talk a woman into bed is a song about rape.
I don’t seem to recall any critiques of the song that went farther than “'I know you want it!' + scantily clad ladies in the video = rape culture!”

Hasn’t Taylor Swift expressly stated that she isn’t a feminist though? Not to absolve the fact that she’s built a career out of being that one bitter ex-girlfriend who can’t quite get over herself, but at least it doesn’t work in contrast with her own ideology.

thefapcontroller:

siryouarebeingmocked:

dickardcain:

ihateeverythingyoulove:

mysoulburns:

THANK YOU

Are you kidding me? He got WAY more shit than she has ever gotten. AND HIS SONG WASNT EVEN ABOUT RAPE.

I love how Taylor Swift is raised up as this icon of “feminist” values… When she routinely slut shames other women, puts other women down, she makes revenge songs routinely and epitomizes some of the common stereotypes of “toxic femininity”.  Not that many feminists would be willing to admit those exist.

Note: I only support the idea of toxic femininity if someone is also speaking of toxic masculinity. I think both men and women have “toxic” personality traits and they can often overlap. 

Remember, a song about a man trying to talk a woman into bed is a song about rape.

I don’t seem to recall any critiques of the song that went farther than “'I know you want it!' + scantily clad ladies in the video = rape culture!

Hasn’t Taylor Swift expressly stated that she isn’t a feminist though? Not to absolve the fact that she’s built a career out of being that one bitter ex-girlfriend who can’t quite get over herself, but at least it doesn’t work in contrast with her own ideology.

(Source: tayloralisin)

Photo 17 Jul 13,293 notes listener-blue:

just-smith:

thentheysaidburnher:

globalvoices:

Women in Bangladesh celebrate at the announcement of recent national high school results. Girls outdid boys in the public exams, despite numerous obstacles that females face in Bangladesh’s education sector.Read more on Global Voices. 

Women are unquestionably superior despite all men’s efforts to hide this fact and destroy us

Men do better than women: There must be systematic oppression, we should be equal.
Women do better than men: Women are unquestionably superior.

The person above though. What the hell?! I do wish people would follow their own train of logic through.
If men are trying to destroy women they’re not doing a very good job are they!? If men have had power over women for all these centuries and have ‘oppressed’ us for so long then surely they would have succeeded in destroying us by now if that was their aim.
But of course women are unquestionably superior. That is why men can’t destroy us. Which begs the question - if women are superior then how the hell have men supposedly ‘controlled’ us for so long?! 
Complete idiocy.

listener-blue:

just-smith:

thentheysaidburnher:

globalvoices:

Women in Bangladesh celebrate at the announcement of recent national high school results. 

Girls outdid boys in the public exams, despite numerous obstacles that females face in Bangladesh’s education sector.

Read more on Global Voices

Women are unquestionably superior despite all men’s efforts to hide this fact and destroy us

Men do better than women: There must be systematic oppression, we should be equal.

Women do better than men: Women are unquestionably superior.

The person above though. What the hell?! I do wish people would follow their own train of logic through.

If men are trying to destroy women they’re not doing a very good job are they!? If men have had power over women for all these centuries and have ‘oppressed’ us for so long then surely they would have succeeded in destroying us by now if that was their aim.

But of course women are unquestionably superior. That is why men can’t destroy us. Which begs the question - if women are superior then how the hell have men supposedly ‘controlled’ us for so long?! 

Complete idiocy.

via .
Video 16 Jul 112 notes

it-goes-both-ways:

Sexual assault in America: Do we know the true numbers? American Enterprise Institute

Not surprisingly the 1 in 5 figure was bullshit but worst of all, the respondents didn’t even get to decide whether or not they were raped, that was decided for them. From the small number of respondents that, ironically, had no choice in even deciding whether or not they were raped, they came up with a figure of 1.3 million women and 12.7 million women and men were sexually assaulted. The most reliable crime survey shows only 188,380 rape/sexual assaults of both men and women.

Text 16 Jul 62 notes

collectiveassbutts:

one thing that kind of makes me uncomfortable is that when the fella who voices that character - Clarence, I think it was? on Cartoon Network sexually assaulted a writer, that news was put up (rightly so, too) all over this website. The person was fired and I believe admitted into more serious therapy (I remember in the article I read covering the whole situation, one of his coworkers talking about the guy’s bipolar disorder that had manic episodes so intense he sometimes broke from reality - and that on the day in question he had at one point been lying in a bed babbling incoherently or something? anyway I’m getting off topic).

And yet the woman who tried to claim that Conor Oberst had raped her has admitted she made it all up, and I’ve seen nothing on this site. From anyone with any ideological agenda (and I mean from any hardcore feminists, from any mras, from egalitarians, anybody). Nothing at all.

And yet that kind of shit is utterly serious, too. Why do you think that cartoon network writer took so long to come forward? She was worried nobody would take her seriously. Why might people not take her seriously? Because fuckheads like this other woman lie about it. Oberst is apparently suing for libel (and he’s got an open-and-shut case on that one), but frankly I think she deserves jail time. Crying wolf doesn’t just harm the person you’re trying to frame (and fortunately it looks as though Oberst hasn’t been as damaged as he might otherwise have been from this), it lowers the entire dialogue. It’s one more piece of proof in the eyes of those who dismiss sexual assault claims as pleas for attention; one more voice of doubt and fear in the minds of the actual victims when they want to come forward telling them not to bother, nobody will listen. 

It’s fucking disgusting, and it makes me uncomfortable that this website - on an issue it claims to inform about better than anywhere else - is so relatively silent about it.

Photo 16 Jul 420 notes rollingstone:

Joanie Faircloth, who alleged that Bright Eyes frontman Conor Oberst had sexually assaulted her, has now admitted that she made the whole story up.
Photo 15 Jul 13,293 notes thentheysaidburnher:

globalvoices:

Women in Bangladesh celebrate at the announcement of recent national high school results. Girls outdid boys in the public exams, despite numerous obstacles that females face in Bangladesh’s education sector.Read more on Global Voices. 

Women are unquestionably superior despite all men’s efforts to hide this fact and destroy us

Men do better than women: There must be systematic oppression, we should be equal.
Women do better than men: Women are unquestionably superior.

thentheysaidburnher:

globalvoices:

Women in Bangladesh celebrate at the announcement of recent national high school results. 

Girls outdid boys in the public exams, despite numerous obstacles that females face in Bangladesh’s education sector.

Read more on Global Voices

Women are unquestionably superior despite all men’s efforts to hide this fact and destroy us

Men do better than women: There must be systematic oppression, we should be equal.

Women do better than men: Women are unquestionably superior.

Text 15 Jul 220 notes RAINN Followup Campaign

permutationofninjas:

Hello, followers!  It’s DJ again!

Remember our campaign to contact RAINN on the 15th of March, and their response?  On June 15th, I mentioned preparing for another campaign; the text of that post will be more or less copied here.

It’s been quite some time since our last campaign, and they haven’t made any of our suggested changes.  I wish for as many people as possible to remind them of our previous campaign on July the 15th.

This gives us much less time to “act” than we had last time, but I’d like to see just how quickly we can mobilize, and if I’ve gotten any better at this.  Furthermore, this campaign is probably not as important and will not be as big as the last one.

Please reblog this message, please queue a reblog for the 15th of July, and please try to get the message out as much as possible!

Finally, my current draft e-mail for this campaign is under the cut.  I’d like to have a number of versions for people to chose from, and I’d like there to be a variety of tones ranging from casual to official.  Do you guys have any suggestions for changes or suggestions for drafts of your own?

Please respond!  I’d like to hear as many ideas and opinions as possible!

Thanks again!

-DJ

Read More

Video 12 Jul 83,041 notes

the-srinimatographer:

2damnfeisty:

thoughtsofablackgirl:

Victims of sexual assault expect privacy. But 16-year-old Jada was violated all over again once explicit images from her rape surfaced on Twitter. So Jada decided to take her story public.

“There’s no point in hiding,” the Houston teen tells KHOU. “Everybody has already seen my face and my body, but that’s not what I am and who I am.”

I’m sharing this because certain people on twitter  NEEDS TO BE STOP! Specially the ignorant side of black twitter! Every time something bad happen to a young black women or black girl twitter is quickly to explode it into something bigger! And Jada story is one of them! She’s a 16 yearls high school student she could be your sister,cousin, neighbor, or classmate! This tragic thing happened to her and these ignorant people on twitter looking for followers exploit this to point where the disgusting hashtag was created #jadapose. People tweeting pictures of themselves in the pose in which Jada was found! What I find even worse about this its that a lot of the people doing these poses are young black men and women. Something like this happen to someone who could possibly be your sister and instead of asking for justice you rather create a new meme? And some of them even argue “oh how do you know she got rape?” Does it matter? a picture of an underage girl laying on the floor looking like she’s passed out is not something be laughed at EVER! Like ”A rape victim’s trauma is not grounds for a new internet meme. Pls do not partake in such ignorance. Report pictures.”

I’m happy and proud of Jada for speaking and not letting this disgusting thing becoming any bigger

Which brings me to what I’m trying to ask or say here when will sexual assault towards black girls and young black women will be taking serious by young black people?

i truly don’t understand what kind of world we live in.

Holy shit people are disgusting

How could anyone even conceive of doing such horrible things

Text 7 Jul 102 notes

dickardcain:

Do you match the dictionary definition of feminism? If so, you are a feminist.

poorpoorpitifulme:

just-smith:

It’s funny how eager we feminists are to bring up the dictionary definition of feminism. “Do you believe in gender equality?” we ask, “because feminism is the movement for gender equality. If you want equality, you should call yourself a feminist”. Rather…

I refuse to associate myself with a label simply because I agree with basic tenets of it.

The fact you seem to suggest demanding people identify as feminist isn’t wholly unreasonable immediately puts me off. Because its like someone saying that if you a line up with a religious outlook its even remotely reasonable to demand you identify as that faith.

I’ll call myself an egalitarian, police the movement as best I’m able and lend support to causes that I agree with. Ultimately regardless of labels of whoever is in charge.

I don’t think anyone gets to even suggest I should change what I call myself simply because I’m in line with their stated goals. It’s a sketchy hard sell tactic and I’m having none of it.

I have made many, many posts about how much I don’t care about labels. I have always judged people on what they believe, not on what they call those beliefs. I have always judged people on how they act, not what banner they do it under. As a result, I have always staunchly opposed attempts to make people identify one way or another, and have expressed that view on this website perhaps hundreds of times.

This post was a further criticism, pointing out that the feminists who use this logic to pressure people into calling themselves feminist don’t use it consistently, don’t use it when faced with the reverse case, and so clearly don’t believe in it at all. I have made thousands and thousands of posts, and there are only so many times that you can say “labels don’t matter” before it gets dull. Here I’ve tried to go beyond that, and outline a new reason the argument can be challenged, one I haven’t seen before.

I’ve then received a bunch of replies saying “labels don’t matter”…

Text 7 Jul 102 notes

rotmeat:

Do you match the dictionary definition of feminism? If so, you are a feminist.

poorpoorpitifulme:

just-smith:

It’s funny how eager we feminists are to bring up the dictionary definition of feminism. “Do you believe in gender equality?” we ask, “because feminism is the movement for gender equality. If you want equality, you should call yourself a feminist”. Rather…

I feel like there’s an entirely different problem with the “dictionary approach”: the dictionary definition just isn’t always comprehensive enough. For example, dictionary.com does indeed define feminism as “1. the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men. 2. sometimes initial capital letter an organized movement for the attainment of such rights for women,” but take a look at its definition of libertarian: “1. a person who advocates libertyespecially with regard to thought or conduct.” and “3. advocating liberty or conforming to principles of liberty.” (The other definitions had to do with other philosophical schools of thought). You’d never be able to tell based on that definition that real-life American libertarians interpret that to mean “small government”, among other things. 

Simply arguing for “equality” doesn’t make you a feminist. Feminism is a particular definition of equality PLUS a particular theoretical background (at minimum). You might as well say that since libertarians are pro-liberty, anyone who doesn’t identify as a libertarian must be inherently pro-oppression. Everyone believes in all of those ideals and no one owns them. Saying that “you’re a feminist if you believe in equality” is nothing but a piece of political propaganda (or “branding” or whatever other term you prefer) designed to broaden feminism’s appeal. It’s not a logical argument.

This post was not supporting the idea of using the dictionary definition in this way, and I’ve called out its use elsewhere. It was simply pointing out that we use it in one area, and not another, and that this proves that we don’t really care about it.

I’m just pointing out a double-standard. I’m not arguing that one or the other of the approaches is great, I’m saying that we should at least choose one and apply it consistently. If we’re going to force the label onto people because they match the dictionary definition, we should also tear it off of those who don’t. If. I’m not supporting doing the former, or supporting doing the latter. For the point of this post, I’d be just as happy if we stopped doing both. I’m simply calling for some consistency.

Text 6 Jul 102 notes Do you match the dictionary definition of feminism? If so, you are a feminist.

poorpoorpitifulme:

just-smith:

It’s funny how eager we feminists are to bring up the dictionary definition of feminism. “Do you believe in gender equality?” we ask, “because feminism is the movement for gender equality. If you want equality, you should call yourself a feminist”. Rather than leaving them free to choose their own label, to ally with the movement they feel best represents them, we claim a monopoly on their ideals and tell them that they are one of us by definition.

It’s funny, because we do the exact opposite at the other end of the scale. When radfems are going a bit far, we almost never check “do you believe in gender equality?”, and we almost never bring out the dictionary definition. We almost never tell them “feminism is the movement for gender equality. If you don’t want equality, you shouldn’t call yourself a feminist.” We leave them free to choose for themselves, and suddenly don’t care about policing how people identity, or ensuring people’s labels match their beliefs.

We clearly don’t care about the latter, then. The whole “dictionary definition” routine is a lie, because we don’t really care whether people believe what’s on their banner, we don’t actually value our objective arguments that they should. If we did, we’d be kicking as many people out as we are dragging people in. We’d be saying “you shouldn’t call yourself a feminist” just as much as we say “you should”.

Rather than policing anti-feminists and egalitarians and MRAs, we’d realise that self-policing comes first, and ensure that our movement actually matches the definition before we start claiming that it does. We clearly don’t actually care about consistency, or accuracy in naming; that’s just a pretence. All that we care about is converting more feminists, increasing quantity over quality. This argument is just one of many that we use to do so.

Do you match the dictionary definition of feminism? If so, you are a feminist. (If not, you are not).

For some reason, the last part is always left out.

I don’t know about this one… I’m definitely all for feminists policing their own movement, but I’ve seen so many feminists try to dismiss the radicals and the misandrists and the extremists by saying they’re not actually feminists. Sometimes they’ll say “not real feminists” but sometimes they’ll just straight up deny that those people are feminists at all, usually using the dictionary definition to do so.

Which would be all well and good, except they pretty much always ignore that, no matter what their opinion of those radicals or misandrists might be, the radicals still consider themselves to be feminists, they still use that label and are counted under the banner of feminism, and they still carry out their actions in the name of feminism. Even if they aren’t actually feminists, they are perceived as feminists, by other feminists, by the rest of the world and by the people who are harmed by their actions and beliefs.

It seems to me that far too many people who try and say “if you don’t match the dictionary definition of feminism you’re not a feminist” are much more concerned with dismissing or avoiding criticisms of feminism and maintaining feminism’s public image than they are with actually ensuring that feminism as a movement maintains its integrity and has a positive effect on the world. I’m not suggesting at all that this is what you’re doing in this post, after all, you’ve been great at calling out harmful feminists and feminist beliefs, but just that many other feminists don’t seem to really grasp what policing their movement should involve and think that sweeping the bad feminists and the harmful ideas under the rug is all that’s needed. 

They definitely use the No True Scotsman approach to “feminists” that they are ashamed of (denying that they are real feminists) but I think that’s a bit different to what I am discussing in this post (actually asking those people to stop calling themselves feminists). The former is only so bad a fallacy, in fact, because they don’t do the latter. If feminists did rigorously self-police, we could take their “they aren’t a real feminist” more seriously. I’m telling them to remove the harmful ideas, not sweep them under the rug, and there’s a big difference between those two things.

As you say: “even if they aren’t actually feminists, they are perceived as feminists, by other feminists, by the rest of the world and by the people who are harmed by their actions and beliefs”. I’m not saying that we should make the “not a real feminist” excuse to other people, I’m saying that we should directly demand that they stop calling themselves feminists, and stop perceiving them in that way.

I’m not even asking for this absolutely: it’s a point about consistency. If we are going to demand that people call themselves feminists if they agree with the basic ideals of feminism, we should also demand that people don’t call themselves feminists if they don’t agree with the basic ideals of feminism. The post isn’t asking for the second part on its own, it is saying that we can either do both, or we can do neither, but we can’t have it both ways.


Design crafted by Prashanth Kamalakanthan. Powered by Tumblr.