Archive for ‘feminism’

June 16th, 2012

It makes total sense that dudes are worried about misandry. That just shows we’re powerful,…

It makes total sense that dudes are worried about misandry. That just shows we’re powerful, and that they’re looking in the wrong place just means we’ll win.  

June 16th, 2012

"Anna Wintour, interviews, museums, culture, art, fashion, history, lookin’ good, Vogue,…"

“Anna Wintour, interviews, museums, culture, art, fashion, history, lookin’ good, Vogue, gay/homosexual, same-sex marriage, Tad, lookin’ good, feminism, civil rights, sexual advances, movies”

- Comedy Central’s tags for the video of Anna Wintour’s appearance on The Colbert Report.
June 6th, 2012

FUCK//KILL//DEVOUR: more on period blood and "feminism"

FUCK//KILL//DEVOUR: more on period blood and "feminism":

farahjoon:

fuckdudeskilldudes:

i mean part of why i’m so into menstruating/menstrual menacing/whatever, personally, isn’t so much the “you should love your body bc REAL WOMEN LOVE THEIR BODIES” shit, bc fuck all that shit. it’s more the “YEAH MENSTRUAL BLOOD FUCKIN’ IS GROSS, but also it’s amazing and not gross at all, but also let’s confront this horrible gross feeling in ourselves and terrorize men with feelings and/or blood”

though I gotta say I’ve been feeling kind of uncomfortable with the way that people (myself obviously included) have been menstruating on the internet lately? which is the most ridiculous thing I have ever said. bc like. MENSTRUATE (OR DON’T MENSTRUATE) HOWEVER THE FUCK YOU WANT TO. and like. i’m excited about making “bleed on everything they love” shirts! i’m excited about rgr’s group menstrual calendar! i genuinely care about whether my menstrual cycle is in phase with the moon! and when I started thinking about this and realizing that menstruating could be this AMAZING PERFECT FEMINIST TERROR body thing instead of this “inconvenient thing that I sort of like, but that I try not to think about too much, and that dudes are grossed out by” it was great. it was totally great and felt very affirming and nurturing and good. but.

BUT.

is this a white lady thing? is this a cis lady thing? is this a gross horrible radscummy thing? should we all be side-eyeing the fuck out of this thing? like WHAT EVEN IS this thing that we are participating in, is my question? what exactly is happening when we are all like “i’m menstruating! i’m menstruating too! ~*internet menstruating bffs*~!”?

like maybe actually the thing that is happening is fine and good and necessary! but maybe it isn’t. and sometimes it does feel kind of bad/weird/wrong. and I don’t quite know where the bad/weird/wrong feeling is coming from - it could be coming from the usual gross misogynist place or it could be coming from somewhere different/better/more uncomfortable though.

but also it doesn’t really matter WHY we do a thing or what we MEANT by it? like i don’t really ever care about intention. I only wanna talk about things/being/doing. so basically my entire point is:

when non-white folks are like “HEY WHITE FEMINISTS THIS THING THAT YOU DO IS GROSS AND REALLY ALIENATING” that is a thing you (we) gotta take seriously and pay attention to

Mona, Rose, Jordan, Cassie, Katina, Alina, Gretchen, Sarah, and I—and, seriously, so many other womyn in our feminist circles—are super fucking into periods and do not identify as “white.” some of us identify as WOC, some of us remain in the liminal space of what I’ll refer to as “half-breed-dom,” some of us are Middle Eastern Americans, some of us are Mestizas, some of us are queer and gender-nonconforming, some of us are trans*, some of us are Two-Spirit. 

while I agree that it is absolutely imperative to check our “passing” privilege and critically interrogate the ways in which we perform our feminisms, I also want to magnify the fact that menstrual menacers are not always solely white, cis radscum.

I wanna say more, but I really love yr post and think you’ve got shit covered. xo 

This and the blood magic thread are some good work, friends.

I’m mostly in it for the puns and the tags.

May 14th, 2012

"There are 3 crucial points here. One, every transsexual has the right to survival on his/her own…"

“There are 3 crucial points here. One, every transsexual has the right to survival on his/her own terms. That means that every transsexual is entitled to a sex-change operation, and it should be provided by the community as one of its functions. This is an emergency measure for an emergency condition. Two, by changing our premises about men and women, role-playing, and polarity, the social situation of transsexuals will be transformed, and transsexuals will be integrated into community, no longer persecuted and despised. Three, community built on androgynous identity will mean the end of transsexuality as we know it. Either the transsexual will be able to expand his/her sexuality into a fluid androgyny, or, as roles disappear, the phenomenon of transsexuality will disappear and that energy will be transformed into new modes of sexual identity and behavior.”

-

Andrea Dworkin, Woman Hating (via negationparty)

Well there ya have it. Second-wave rad-scum indeed eh?

(via suzy-x)

i mean also she eventually ended up assisting in the creation of “the transsexual empire” and stopped sticking up for trans women the moment it became inconvenient. so really only dworkin circa 1974 is off the hook

(via negationparty)

Fuck, well that’s some inconsistency. I mean I knew of THAT Dworkin but I’m surprised that she wrote this BEFORE taking part in the hot mess that is The Transsexual Empire.

(via suzy-x)

April 21st, 2012

When was the last time white feminists were mad that black men in the US make 74¢ on the white man’s dollar?

navigatethestream:

readnfight:

I guess around the same time as white Occupiers were outraged about a white unemployment rate that is high but still less than half the black unemployment rate i.e. never.

I’m going through labor statistics and making posters. Ready to blow up some one dimensional bullshit.

can you please make them reblogable? 

April 19th, 2012

pussy-strut: babyonce: holla at first-wave feminists burning shit bombing shit badass…

pussy-strut:

babyonce:

holla at first-wave feminists

burning shit

bombing shit

badass bitches

petition for an intersectional first wave revival cause they were also racist as all shit

basically i just want to burn more shit more of time here

help me out guys

i need feminism because burning shit down.

I’ve been reading Wollenstonecraft and I feel this deeply.

April 17th, 2012

"Why has it been difficult for feminists to imagine violence as a viable strategy for political…"

“Why has it been difficult for feminists to imagine violence as a viable strategy for political transformation? Why, despite a documented history of women’s violent struggle, have women tended to disavow their capacity for violence? Part of the answer can be found in the representational habit of positing resistance as the logical negation of the thing being resisted. In the case of violence, this means that - since men wield violence against women in an effort to maintain relations of domination - the use of violence by women would only serve to strengthen the logic of domination itself. Rachel Neumann confirms this tendency when she describes the feelings that some anti-globalization activists had with respect to the Black Bloc riot. In her account, protester violence seems to reiterate existing power imbalances. “Property destruction,” she notes, “has often been linked with larger uses of violence […] Because of the way that men in particular are taught to repress and vent their anger, it often comes out as an exaggerated representation of masculinity, reproducing instead of contradicting the existing power structure.”

According to this logic, by using violence to smash the violent system, activists end by reinforcing the system itself. Here, violence is construed as a logical quantity, a sign that can only be negated by siding with its representational antithesis. But Neumann’s formulation says more about the state of our current political impoverishment (where everything is subsumed within the representational sphere) than it does about violence itself. And while it can be easily transposed into the field of representation, violence itself is not merely a representational act. Its political effects can’t be measured on a balance sheet of stable significations. By abstracting violence from its social context, by distilling it into a representational essence and disconnecting it from the world of lived experience, activists run the risk of foreclosing the possibility of even contemplating the political use of violence.”

-

Black Bloc, White Riot: Anti-Globalization and the Genealogy of Dissent (via combat—wombat)

If you had asked me 2 years ago how I felt about “violence” (and/or destruction) as a tactic, I would have made some quip about violence being the status quo and how everyone needs to be less violent, especially “men.” But I thought about how I was often punished for violently lashing back at other kids who spoke a word against me in grade school, whereas men in my family would beat women like it was a standard procedure. I resented it a lot, and eventually had taken to the idea that I might as well denounce all violence in order to deal with that resentment. But one can only sit with such resentment for so long, before fantasizing about, even realizing some kind of retribution or destruction of that which strengthens resentment. Deep in my heart I’d love for a world in which everyone to be “less violent,” but I no longer believe in that world, like I no longer believe male-socialized people have a monopoly on “violence” or destruction.

(via suzy-x)

April 15th, 2012

suzy-x: newsweek: Here’s this week’s cover, on newsstands and…



suzy-x:

newsweek:

Here’s this week’s cover, on newsstands and the iPad tomorrow morning. And the summary of the corresponding story: 

In an age where women are dominating - in the workplace, at school, at home - why are they seeking to be dominated in their love lives? Recent media portrayals have shown that a rising number of modern women fantasize about being overpowered, while studies are turning out statistics that bewilder feminists. New shows like HBO’s Girls and books like Fifty Shades of Grey are showcasing the often hidden desire for powerlessness. But why? Katie Roiphe examines the submissive yet empowered female in Newsweek. “It is perhaps inconvenient for feminism that the erotic imagination does not submit to politics, or even changing demographics,” she writes.

We haven’t seen the cover story yet, but color us intrigued! Let’s hear your pre-thoughts, tumblr.

Which women? I won’t go so far as to say that no women of color have submission fantasies, but given that you’ve based your work on media representations and whatever Katie Roiphe of all people has to say, I’m assuming you only mean straight white working women of the middle-upper class. While white women in particular are overrepresented when compared to WOC in television, film and journalism, it doesn’t strike me as anything new or compelling. My 2 cents.

This is going to ruin my life on multiple levels.

April 15th, 2012

"I was going to die, sooner or later, whether or not I had even spoken myself. My silences had not…"

I was going to die, sooner or later, whether or not I had even spoken myself. My silences had not protected me. Your silences will not protect you…. What are the words you do not yet have? What are the tyrannies you swallow day by day and attempt to make your own, until you will sicken and die of them, still in silence? We have been socialized to respect fear more than our own need for language.

I began to ask each time: “What’s the worst that could happen to me if I tell this truth?” Unlike women in other countries, our breaking silence is unlikely to have us jailed, “disappeared” or run off the road at night. Our speaking out will irritate some people, get us called bitchy or hypersensitive and disrupt some dinner parties. And then our speaking out will permit other women to speak, until laws are changed and lives are saved and the world is altered forever.

Next time, ask: What’s the worst that will happen? Then push yourself a little further than you dare. Once you start to speak, people will yell at you. They will interrupt you, put you down and suggest it’s personal. And the world won’t end.

And the speaking will get easier and easier. And you will find you have fallen in love with your own vision, which you may never have realized you had. And you will lose some friends and lovers, and realize you don’t miss them. And new ones will find you and cherish you. And you will still flirt and paint your nails, dress up and party, because, as I think Emma Goldman said, “If I can’t dance, I don’t want to be part of your revolution.” And at last you’ll know with surpassing certainty that only one thing is more frightening than speaking your truth. And that is not speaking.



-

Audre Lorde (via diamondmind)

I love that this was on my dash right after Kara’s post.

April 14th, 2012

"The thing about patriarchy is that individual men, gay and straight, are often really wonderful…"

“The thing about patriarchy is that individual men, gay and straight, are often really wonderful people who you love deeply, but they have internalized some really poisonous shit. So every once in a while they say or do something that really shakes you because you’re no longer totally certain they see you as a human being, and you feel totally disempowered to explain that to them.”

-

(via creepinthecellar)

Forever reblog.

(via littleletters)

I will never not reblog this even if I JUST did. (via subtletysmyweakness)

this is the same way i feel about having white friends because this shit happen and it just freaks me and out I LOVE YA’LL AND I KNOW IT’S INTERNALIZED AND IT SLIPS OUT but ugh :(

(via brazenbitch)

have been on both sides of this one/am on both sides of this one