factualfeminist:

How sexism works.
Source
via  afternoonsnoozebutton  (originally  factualfeminist)
2 years ago on 5 August 2012 ~ 9:15pm 12,511 notes
Guys on Reddit are very typically coming from STEM fields - a lot of engineers, a lot of programmers. I really think the complete lack of basic understanding of social justice on Reddit, the lack of understanding of how past oppression continues to exert force on the present, is reflective of a larger failure of a good humanities education. It’s reflective of the increasing early specialization we require of college and even high school kids. Their STEM curriculums don’t require much of a humanities or social science foundation, so they grow up completely unarmed with the tools required to think critically about society, and totally unaware of how social structures shape everyone’s lives - and it’s especially invisible to them as mostly white, middle-class, straight males.
~

Why is Reddit so Anti-Women?” Fascinating (and highly sensical) approach here, underscoring what gets lost when education (policy) is viewed as strictly the science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields (the globally profitable/innovation-driven ones) at the expense of social/cultural education. (via marathonpacks)

Yup.

(via gaysagainstgaga)

AND reinforcing the overall White maleness of STEM fields. Vicious cycle, that.

(via 14kgoldnyc)

2 years ago on 4 August 2012 ~ 6:37pm 3,641 notes
In pop culture, girls who crush hopelessly on guys they can’t have are painted as just that – hopeless. Over and over again, we’re taught that girls who openly express sexual or romantic interest in guys who don’t want them are pitiable, stalkerish, desperate, crazy bitches. More often than not, they’re also portrayed as ugly – whether physically, emotionally or both – in order to further establish their undesirability as an objective fact. Both narratively and, as a consequence, in real life, men are given free reign to snub, abuse, mislead and talk down to such women: we’re raised to believe that female desire is unseemly, so that any consequent shaming is therefore deserved. There is no female-equivalent Friend Zone terminology because, in the language of our culture, a man’s romantic choices are considered sacrosanct and inviolable. If a girl has been told no, then she has only herself to blame for anything that happens next – but if a woman says no, then she must not really mean it. Or, if she does, she shouldn’t: the rejected man is a universally sympathetic figure, and everyone from moviegoers to platonic onlookers will scream at her to justgive him a chance, as though her rejection must always be unfounded rather than based on the fact that he had a chance, and blew it. And even then, give him another one! The pathos of Single Nice Guys can only be eased by pity-sex with unwilling women that blossoms into romance!
~ Lamenting the Friendzone, or: The Nice Guy Approach to Perpetuating Sexist Bullshit (via nyquilontherocks)
2 years ago on 30 July 2012 ~ 11:21pm 69,501 notes

the thing that gets me about the “misandry means women are scared when I stalk them” thing

missvoltairine:

desliz:

missvoltairine:

is that I’ve had dudes do shit like that to me on multiple occasions

almost always at night, always white dudes who get offended that I am trying to give them a wide berth or avoid them in the street. It’s always these dudes who decide that they are so fucking entitled to dictate where and how I fucking walk on the fucking public sidewalk that they are justified in rushing me, grabbing me, chasing me, in one case circling me tightly so I couldn’t get away, and then fucking laughing at my obvious panic and fear because “omg lighten up, lady!!!!”

like, this is an actual thing dudes do

their solution to women being afraid alone at night is to give them more reasons to be afraid, and then turn around and mock and insult them for being afraid

fucking logic/fucking basic human decency/fucking people

how do they work

yesterday I was at a bookstore with a male friend. I was staring at a shelf; he was just around the corner at a computer the store provides to search their inventory. This is significant because as we stood there, a dude just blows in and says, very loudly and intrusively, “Any good books on this shelf?!” It takes me a moment to realize he’s alone and talking to me. At that point I glance over at my friend, who’s wide-eyed at this guy’s arrogance, and boom, intrusive dude realizes I’m with a ~chaperone~. At this point, I was uncomfortable enough that I walked away. My friend comes after me and says, “Wow, that was weird.”

Of course, I then had to explain it wasn’t weird at all; this kind of thing happens to me all the time when I’m by myself. Men come out of nowhere and demand responses from me, knowing that most women are socialized to stand there and giggle uncomfortably while they impose on their space and time. I used to do that, even though I hated every second of it. We are taught to fear leaving and taught to fear staying, and of course, when we relate these stories, the maliciousness is so subtle and context-dependent that people who weren’t there feel free to assert that we must be overreacting.

What suddenly occurred to me was the sheer depth of the danger inherent in fact that men take care not to do this in front of men who might conceivably be sympathetic towards a given woman. It causes men, even men who are quite decent and aware of sexism, to wonder why they never see these things women keep saying are so common. Not only does it cause us to lose credibility, but it also allows the men who DO act this way to maintain the mental division between “having fun” and being a person who deserves to be feared and avoided.

this is really important commentary so I’m reblogging for the bolded, because:

1. when we talk about sexism making women feel “crazy” it’s important to understand that there really is a sort of mass gaslighting (for lack of a better term) going on; incidents like this are part of that. First you induce fear in someone, then you humiliate them for their fear response, and best of all, the whole thing is so context-dependent that when they try to explain that this happens all the time and is a problem chances are, especially if they are trying to explain this to a dude, they’ll be told they’re over-reacting. That is some fucking systemic abusive behavior.

2. there is a real kind of selective sociopathy at play here. Dudes know on some level that this is not okay, so they hide it from their fellow dudes, but they still get their fucking rocks off over it, they do it for fun. To get enjoyment out of a woman’s terror. And these are ordinary dudes, who just deny deny deny that that is fucked up so much and deliberately avoid situations where they might be told by another dude that it’s fucked up so they can continue to do it. Just. Yeah.

via  astheshadowslovethecastle  (originally  missvoltairine)
2 years ago on 10 July 2012 ~ 12:45am 3,552 notes

lirulin:

roshquita:

This is a response to Ian Browns horrendous article pubished in the Globe and Mail over the weekend titles “Why Men Can’t-and Shouldn’t- Stop Staring at women which you can read here: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/why-men-cant-and-shouldnt-stop-staring-at-women/article2379872/singlepage/#articlecontent She is very eloquent and passionate, I highly recommend you watch!

This article makes me so angry and goes to show how far we still have to go in Canada to achieve equal rights between men and women. 

I was so creeped out reading that article.

— you gross motherfucker, Ian Brown. I kind of wish he’d have asked me my opinion while creating this crap - I would have given him a piece of my mind (a lot of shouting and cursing would have been involved).

2 years ago on 29 March 2012 ~ 3:00pm 8 notes

No, really, I want to know.

lirulin:

sinidentidades:

Why does it take Rush Limbaugh to call an affluent, white woman a “slut” to realize that he’s an asshole? He’s said plenty of similar, if not worse, things about women of color in the past. Where was the outrage then? Why is everyone up in arms now? 

Look at this list of things that he’s said about women of color, and I dare you to tell me that we live in a post-racial society.

That ‘make me a porn video thing’ was even more revolting - you expect right-wingers to slut-shame, but that…ick…everything he says is vile.

I’m glad this piece of shit is getting more attention for his revolting views, I can’t argue with that, but it should have happened earlier, far earlier. What he has said before should not have been passed over - not that it was always or entirely passed over - I knew he was revolting ever since I knew of his existence, though I wouldn’t often seek out more of his vitriol even to educate myself on just how revolting because RAGE - but this level of public condemnation, however awesome, isn’t something I have seen before. And we should have seen it before.

2 years ago on 2 March 2012 ~ 6:16pm 1,158 notes
2 years ago on 19 February 2012 ~ 3:07pm 66 notes

Your Cleavage Is Guilty of Sexual Harassment, and Other Stories

kathleenthearsonist:

The kind of particularly male pain that Arndt and her allies describe isn’t rooted in women’s flirtatiousness, sexy clothing, or presumed preference for “alpha” males. Whether they’re genuinely hurting or just petulantly sulking, the confusion and hurt with which men cope is based largely on their own sense of entitlement. The calculus of entitlement works like this: if women don’t want to turn men on, they need to cover up. If they don’t cover up, they’ll turn men on. If they turn men on, women are obligated to do something to assuage that lust. Having turned them on, if women don’t give men what they want, then women are cruel teases who have no right to complain if men lash out in justified rage at being denied what they’ve been taught is rightfully theirs.”

Basically, this article outlines the Men’s Rights Advocates’ position that a woman wearing any kind of revealing clothing that does not want to sleep with any man who sees her and likes what he sees is committing a particularly cruel kind of sexual harassment— by discriminating in her sexual partners, she is making the men she doesn’t choose feel humiliated, afraid, and insecure.  So basically, ladies, if you’re going to put it out there, you better be ready to have sex with absolutely any man who decides he’d like to have sex with YOU, or else you are a cruel, manipulating tease who is only frustrating a man who just wants access to your vagina (which, since you turned him on, he feels he is entitled to).

Where do these people come from?

2 years ago on 16 February 2012 ~ 12:07pm 11 notes
To generalize enormously, the less privileged the background, the more intense the sense of competition among young women. Far too many young ones grow up with a sense that their sexual desirability is a more marketable commodity than their intellectual accomplishments; this is all the more likely to be true in families where there isn’t a history of women going to college. (If you don’t believe me, visit any American community college on a hot day — and then visit an elite university in the same weather. You’ll see more mini-skirts and heels in five minutes at Pasadena City College than you will in five hours at Berkeley or Stanford. That’s anecdotal, sure, but don’t take my word for it — try it yourself.) The bottom line: class and sexual competitiveness among women are, to say the least, not unrelated!
~

I had somehow managed to avoid reading this Schwyzer piece until now. It fucking sucks. It’s gross and classist and racist and sexist and violent and horrible and it’s also fucking hurts me. Fuck this guy. Fuck him for “herding” not just sluts but poor sluts and then making money off of turning them into a farce. Fuck this guy, seriously.

Here’s more:

Many first-generation male students, particularly but not exclusively East Asian (PCC is over 33% Asian), are ostentatiously fond of labels, particularly those that they associate with the “establishment.”  Every year, even on hot summer days, my classes will be filled with remarkably neat young men in pressed khakis wearing Ralph Lauren, Lacoste, A&F, or even — oh, flashbacks to ’80s preppydom! — Brooks Brothers polo shirts.  The labels are always conspicuous.  Reading Glendenb’s comments, it occurs to me that these young upwardly mobile fellows are indeed mimicking what they imagine to be the appropriate attire of the privileged.  (Only later will some of them transfer to Cal, Stanford, and Georgetown and discover that the real privileged tend to be far more unkempt.) 

This is racist, orientalist, classist bullshit. To Schwyzer, immigrants’ participation in American cultures amounts to no more than “mimicry.” They can never be genuine participants in white culture, they can never “master” Schwyzer’s cultural practices. Because they are Asian. And God forbid, you know, Asian-Americans actually be among a wealthy class. God forbid he allow them to access American culture without hurling ridicule and racist tropes.

His premise, here, is that by virtue of their race and ethnicity, Asian-American people could not possibly authentically access American WASP culture. I am reminded of Minh-ha T. Pham’s piece “The Racial Construction of Preppiness“—

That this American should covet the “American style” of RLP and the aspirational social and economic values it symbolizes and secures is hardly noteworthy. Socioeconomic climbing is the promise at the heart of the American Dream. For Ditum, though, Villareal’s Americanness is not legible because his brown body is an inappropriate representative of the U.S. national body (which she describes in the racial terms of “gilded WASP”).

He is sexist, classist, racist, and abusive. That’s one thing, I guess? But how does an educational institution allow him to get away with publicly degrading their own students and demographics on racist, sexist, and classist grounds? What the fuck kind of institution allows a professor to publicly state disdain for his East Asian students—he names some of them!—without some serious ethics hearings?

What? What?

(via rgr-pop)

2 years ago on 15 February 2012 ~ 12:22pm 42 notes

Ways Gender-Privileged Men Can Challenge Sexism

meeca:

(This list will be forever in-progress. Please add on as you see fit).

  • Challenge sexist jokes, such as dumb blonde jokes or jokes about rape.
  • Avoid using words such as “bitch”, “ho”, “slut.”
  • Recognize when you “zone out” when women are speaking, when you value a man’s opinion more than a woman’s, or when you ask a man for information or advice rather than a woman.
  • Recognize times when you “zone out” when a woman is speaking because you are sexualizing her.
  • In group efforts, take on tasks such as photocopying, note taking, making phone calls, or providing childcare, which are usually given to women; encourage women to take on male-dominated tasks such as leading meetings, or acting as a spokesperson.
  • Use gender-neutral language (ex. Firefighter, chairperson).
  • Do not tell a woman how she should understand, express, or conceptualize experiences of discrimination and sexism.
  • If a woman is offended by your actions or words, do not use tone arguments. If she does not accept your apology, recognize that she does not owe you anything.
  • Check in regularly with your intimate partner(s) to make sure they feel comfortable, fulfilled and empowered by your intimacy.
  • Do not make sexist jokes about how your partner (or any woman) drags you to go see chick flicks, forces you to go shopping, has you whipped, or is irritable because she is menstruating. Challenge others when they make these jokes. Avoid playing the role of the long-suffering man who has to hold a woman’s shopping bags and put up with her frivolities and vanity. 
  • Be polite, thoughtful, and considerate to women because they are individuals who deserve respect, not because you’re a “gentleman” or because of chauvinistic ideals.
  • When a woman is completing a task, refrain from stepping in and telling her or showing her “the best way to do that.” Of course, if she asks for your advice or requires help, feel free to do so. But recognize that women are just as competent and capable as you.
  • Apologize if you realize you may have offended someone, whether they mention it or not. Do not say: “If that offended you then I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to.” Instead, frankly tell them: “I’m sorry I did that and I recognize it wasn’t okay. I’ll try harder next time.”
  • Do not use expressions such as “grow a pair”, “be a man”, “man up”, or “stop being a bitch.”
  • Reject forms of media and entertainment that promote sexism. Don’t excuse sexism and discrimination just because “it’s a really good movie.”
  • Recognize that just because you are a feminist or work to challenge sexism does not mean you lose gender privilege.
  • Do not be offended if you offer to help a woman and she rejects your help. Although you may genuinely have meant to be a good citizen by offering to help lift heavy objects or holding open a door, accept that the woman does not need your help, and that this does not make her a “bitch.”
  • Recognize that while some women do hate men and do discriminate against men, that this sort of discrimination occurs in isolation, while sexism against women is backed by centuries of literature, scientific discourse, power/knowledge, philosophy, media representations, “common sense” discourse, etc.
  • Realize that representations of women that you might find positive or fair might not be empowering to women. Notice that the vast majority of “positive” female characters or depictions in the media are highly sexualized to appeal to a male audience.
  • Understand that much of what you’ve been taught to take for granted (that you are allowed to have an opinion and to voice it; that you can take up all the space you need; that you can become whoever you want; that you can pursue any career or dream you like) is often painfully untrue for women.
  • When anyone tells you to stop, or says “no”, or does not actively give consent during any sort of physical contact or intimacy, immediately stop what you are doing. Do not sulk. Do not interrogate if the person is unwilling to explain. Do not complain or make them feel as though their choice to decide what sort of intimacy they want is not an empowered, safe choice.
  • Do not make explanations such as “I didn’t mean anything by it”, “It was a joke, you’re just sensitive”, or “I’m not sexist, I have a lot of female friends.” If you have offended someone, listen carefully and learn from the experience. 
  • Do not police women’s bodies by deciding that “women shouldn’t plaster their faces with makeup”, or that “women should stop dressing like sluts to please men.” 
tags   sexism  
via  lieutolu  (originally  meeca)
2 years ago on 8 February 2012 ~ 8:26am 4,518 notes
— laughing like a motherfucker.

— laughing like a motherfucker.

2 years ago on 25 January 2012 ~ 8:17pm 8,313 notes

stfuhypocrisy:

Canadian Women’s Favourite Pick-up Line (by ShitHarperDid)

— true true

2 years ago on 22 January 2012 ~ 3:46pm 22 notes

From a very young age we’re basically taught to think of racism and “anything bad” isms as something “very bad people [consciously] do.” We are always taught to identify with the good guys and wonder what the bad guys were thinking. We then have a lot of trouble actually identifying evil thoughts within ourselves, because we don’t see ourselves as being “evil people.”


But part of truly understanding the horror of many acts in history is understanding that the people who made them happen were not particularly evil- the people that followed weren’t particularly evil. That evil often happens in little steps, tiny jokes and references and cultural nuances until something snaps and the whole thing snowballs into chaos and upheaval. Evil as it occurs when groups of people are denied rights or killed or discriminated against or whatever isn’t necessarily the result of an evil thought, but rather the result of a lack of conscious thoughts fighting evil.

~

feministdisney (via stay-in-skull)

I’m reblogging this quote of myself because I’m tickled that I am able to find so many random references to my blog I never saw before through googling it. Haha

(via feministdisney)

— all of this. we need *much much much* better education.

2 years ago on 22 January 2012 ~ 2:38pm 2,515 notes

Moffat and Motherhood

lirulin:

nerdulernerdance:

““I was called a misogynist because I was reducing women to mothers. ‘Reducing women to mothers’ – now there is possibly the most anti-women statement I’ve heard.””

- Stephen Moffat

Sorry to break this to you, Moff, but if you confine women to being strong only when they’re mothers, that is misogynist. Having one strong, interesting women character (River Song) does not absolve you of the sexism of keeping every other woman you write in a submissive role.

Who gets the character development in your writing? The men do. River and Amy are static characters while Rory gets to develop into a badass.

For people who can explain this in more detail, see here:

http://fozmeadows.wordpress.com/2011/12/12/sexism-in-sherlock/

http://fozmeadows.wordpress.com/2011/05/01/doctor-who-season-6/

http://www.phoebenorth.com/2011/09/12/the-woman-who-waited/

http://tigerbeatdown.com/2011/08/04/the-girl-who-waited-why-i-hate-amy-pond/

LOL UR SEXIST CUZ U THINK MOTHERHOOD IS BAD YO HAHA NOT ME I ONLY THINK WIMMIN R BEST AND STRONGEST WEN DEY DO WAT DE PATRIARCHY TELS DEM 2 DO CUZ TEH LORD FERBID DEY BE NETHING OTHER THEN A UTERUS

2 years ago on 20 January 2012 ~ 9:10pm 13 notes
bullshitwonder:

Homophobia as a Weapon of Sexism, Suzanne Phar

— so much truth

bullshitwonder:

Homophobia as a Weapon of Sexism, Suzanne Phar

— so much truth

2 years ago on 16 January 2012 ~ 3:17pm 12 notes