25 4 / 2014

Anonymous asked: I have yet to receive an actual answer on this question from any feminist; why do you need to focus on women? There IS sexism against men. Ask a loving father who gave up his daughter to a neglecting mother because "women make better parents". Or how about men who can't jokingly make fun of a friend who is a girl because, from my friend's mouth, "he's a guy, guys can't say stuff like that to girls but we can say it to them". Why can't we just have equalism? Where we focus on EVERYONE not one.

teaandfeminism:

I was going to delete this but then I thought that given how nice and educational I’m feeling, today’s the one and only day when I will answer basic shit like this.

The reason no one has answered your bullshit question is because most of us have evolved far beyond the level of feminism where we’re all about being nice and educating people who are unwilling to learn. If you gave a single fuck about the answer to this question, you would have already done your research. Putting minimal effort into researching would have taught you that women are systematically discriminated against and oppressed by men, that no, sexism against men doesn’t actually exist, and that giving an equal amount of attention to the oppressors as we do to the oppressed changes exactly nothing.

There is no sexism against men. Everything you can call sexism against men stems from misogyny. To respond to your particular example, in about 90% of divorce cases, the parents decide who gets custody without the court getting involved. When the courts do get involved, however, about 70% of fathers who seek custody get it. There is no court bias, and once again, if you had done any research at all, you would have probably already learned this.

Regarding what your friend said, I’m assuming that what you failed to specify was that the jokes in question were misogynistic and not just playful teasing between friends, in which case they’re absolutely right. There is a huge difference between making fun of the oppressors (i.e. men, if that’s not already clear enough) and making fun of the oppressed. Jokes that make women the punchline aren’t jokes, because they perpetuate a systemic oppression that has been in place for centuries. They are harmful because they reinforce an existing misogynistic mindset. “Misandry” jokes are reactionary. They are an act of resistance. And unlike misogynistic jokes, they are just words that will never cause violence or oppression of any kind. Note how strange it is that 99% of the time it’s only jokes against the oppressors that illicit a response from anyone. When people make fun of the oppressed, that’s still passed off as just a joke.

So no, we can’t have “equalism” and focus on everyone equally. Women face a whole slew of issues that men don’t even realize exist. If you take an inequality and add the same constant to both sides, it remains an inequality. Feminism is necessary and must absolutely prioritize women if we aim to change that. 

Next time feel free to go through my feminism tag and Google some stuff before you waste my time with questions that have already been answered a million times.

25 4 / 2014

coldhearted-icequeen:

afternoonsnoozebutton:

I am feeling this on a SPIRITUAL level this morning

I mean, I don’t think America was ever really like that, but I agree with her

(Source: sandandglass, via angryfeminism)

25 4 / 2014

asanaambitions:

Friendly reminder to check your breasts while you’re just sitting there scrolling the internet, then reblog so your followers do the same. Two people I know were just diagnosed within the same week.

asanaambitions:

Friendly reminder to check your breasts while you’re just sitting there scrolling the internet, then reblog so your followers do the same. Two people I know were just diagnosed within the same week.

(via radfematheist)

25 4 / 2014

ursulatheseabitchh:

The last three Disney films that starred POC were the Emperor’s New Groove in 2000, Brother Bear in 2003 and Princess and the Frog in 2009.

What did they have in common?

image

image

image

Exactly.

(via angryfeminism)

24 4 / 2014

brasspistol:

every time I see this it gets reblogged

(Source: sandandglass, via obsessionally-challenged)

24 4 / 2014

24 4 / 2014

lilkittygrl:

you-can-call-me-carl:

How come a girl can wear guys clothes and look cute or wear a suit and look hot, but when a guy wears a dress or a skirt it’s weird?

because our society thinks it’s degrading to be feminine

(via and-the-little-one-said)

24 4 / 2014

radicallyfeminist:

genderheretic:

scaredfem:

i feel like i’m in this weird middle-space of radical feminism where i respect trans women as women and will use the correct pronouns for trans women and get very upset when people intentionally use the wrong pronouns or call trans women “drag queens” or “cross dressers”

but also i understand…

I was there too for a while, and the thing is that talking about them being MtF isn’t disrespectful, that’s why the trans in transwoman exists. Their maleness is a fact. Most radical feminists use correct pronouns when we’re not talking about socialization, privilege, etc. But it’s important to emphasize that they’re not women, they’re transwomen, which is an entirely different concept and experience. I think it’s very problematic to use the word ‘woman’ so flippantly, because it doesn’t denote an identity or a feeling, but oppressive socialization from birth into a caste system based on our sex.

^^^this too.

24 4 / 2014

Anonymous asked: There's a post going around saying that leaving Laverne Cox off of the Time 100 Influential People or whatever is an act of violence and erasure and I'm not sure if it's serious or not.... but how is that an act of violence? I can see erasure, yeah, but violence? Why does everything having to do with disagreeing with a transwoman suddenly become "violent"? You're awesome, btw.

appropriately-inappropriate:

It isn’t.

"Violent" is just this week’s buzzword, and one whose use I find particularly egregious.

The trans woman who was beaten to death with rocks in Guadalajara in 2013? Violence.
The Travesi who was murdered by a John in a favela in Rio?
Violence.

Trans women—and especially women of colour—face violence. That’s a fact.

Being left off the Time 100?
NOT violence.

24 4 / 2014

"In politics it’s okay to be a pussy unless you have a dick"

Jon Stewart (via radfematheist)

24 4 / 2014

emilye:

britishblu:

When pro-‘life’rs say “It’s not a 'fetus', it’s a baby!”
No.
It’s not.
[not only by the words’ definitions but also because science]

You do realize it says "unborn human baby" in the definition of fetus, right?
For the record, “baby” is actually not a medical or scientific term anyway.  A newly or recently born human child is a “neonate.”  Similarly, “fetus” does not describe what it is so much as it describes a stage of development.  Human development goes like this: zygote —> embryo —> fetus —> neonate —> infant —> toddler —> child —> adolescent —> adult.  These are the developmental stages of a human being, and they are conceptual constructions for convenience of description, NOT separate entities.   In referring to “the embryo,” or “the fetus,” we are not referring to something distinct from the human being that each of us is, but rather to a certain stage in the development of each human being. 
And that’s not a matter of opinion, conjecture, speculation or theory. Rather, it’s the expression of reality as determined by scientific observation and analysis.

Whether pro-life or pro-choice, terminology is important.

emilye:

britishblu:

When pro-‘life’rs say “It’s not a 'fetus', it’s a baby!

No.

It’s not.

[not only by the words’ definitions but also because science]

You do realize it says "unborn human babyin the definition of fetus, right?

For the record, “baby” is actually not a medical or scientific term anyway.  A newly or recently born human child is a “neonate.”  Similarly, “fetus” does not describe what it is so much as it describes a stage of development.  Human development goes like this: zygote —> embryo —> fetus —> neonate —> infant —> toddler —> child —> adolescent —> adult.  These are the developmental stages of a human being, and they are conceptual constructions for convenience of description, NOT separate entities.   In referring to “the embryo,” or “the fetus,” we are not referring to something distinct from the human being that each of us is, but rather to a certain stage in the development of each human being. 

And that’s not a matter of opinion, conjecture, speculation or theory. Rather, it’s the expression of reality as determined by scientific observation and analysis.

Whether pro-life or pro-choice, terminology is important.

(via betterthanabortion)

24 4 / 2014

letstalkaboutrape:

I posted last week asking people if they knew of some good resources for male victims of sexual assault. Here is the list people came up with:

www.malesurvivor.org

www.violenceunsilenced.com

www.rainn.org

www.pandys.org

www.1in6.org

www.soulspeakout.org

Thanks everyone!

(via radfematheist)

24 4 / 2014

(Source: sandandglass, via goldentulips)

24 4 / 2014

trekual-innuendos:

Lets have a dystopian future movie where none of the actors are white

Not a single one

No reason

No explanation

There’s just no white people and not a single character questions it

Watch how quickly people notice and get pissed off

(via punkrocklibrarydork)

23 4 / 2014

asgardiansouffle asked: Ok, I get that you believe society forces gender roles onto people. But, what about the men who, as children, gravitate towards traditionally feminine things (dolls, skirts/dresses, nail polish, etc)? The women who, as children, gravitate towards traditionally masculine things (toy trucks, erector sets, legos, etc.)? Despite having family who buy them gender-oriented things. Socialization plays some role in gender identity, but a person's natural inclinations also matter.

transgender-harms-women:

Male children who like traditionally “female” things like dolls and skirts are just being themselves. They are not trans. They do not have gender identity disorder. They are just being themselves. Same with female children who like traditionally “male” or masculine things like trucks and legos.

This is not gender. Gender is a system of oppression that places females at the bottom and socializes them to be subservient to males, who are placed above them. Males are socialized to dominate women, be aggressive, sexual, emotionally-numb. They are raised with privilege and entitlement to female areas and bodies. All of this encompasses gender. Gender is not an individual action or choice.