"Loving to Survive" Graham (via kingcobracommander)
and its interesting that when watching tv or reading things the “man cave” always gets brought up as a half joke but really more serious thing that every man “needs” but then when women have craft rooms or other similar things related to their own interest it is always the butt of a joke (haha silly wimminz wanting space of their own)
We’re looking for our next house right now and we are looking for one with enough space that I can have a craft room. That’s non negotiable, I craft a lot and it’s good for my mental health but mostly it’s important to me and therefore it’s important to my boyfriend too.
When I tell people that there is a LOT of pushback. They act like we are being extravagant (I’m aware we are very privileged to be able to afford this but this is fro. People with three cars and five tvs) or say thing like ‘where will [boyfriend] go?!’
Oh I dunno, LITERALLY ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WHOLE HOUSE, which is also his? Where will he watch tv? Probably the lounge room. You know. Where the tv is.
Or they say ‘will he at least get a shed??’ No, since he hates gardening. Probably I will get a shed.
It makes me so mad, but I hadn’t really articulated why until this post.
I wish I could go the rest of my life without seeing or hearing the word “monosexual” again.
something that really bothers me - women identifying as nonbinary because they don’t subscribe to the oppressive beauty standards placed upon them by patriarchy. a great deal of us don’t want to subscribe to them and identify their existence as what it is—misogyny—but trying to “identify” our way out of “woman” does not erase the oppression. it upholds the damage done to young girls by normalizing these standards as inherent to “cis women”.
From the late 1990s, my attention, as a feminist sociologist, kept being drawn to media images, which were intended to provoke some, imagined group of (always humourless) feminists. These images appeared, in a celebratory fashion, to reverse the clock, turning it back to some earlier prefeminist moment, while at the same time doing so in a rather tongue-in-cheek kind of way. The prevailing use of irony seemed to exonerate the culprits from the crime of offending against what was caricatured as a kind of extreme, and usually man-hating feminism, while at the same time acknowledging that other, more acceptable, forms of feminism, had by now entered into the realms of common sense and were broadly acceptable. The famous ‘Hello Boys’ Wonderbra billboard advertisement was the most obvious example.
The rhetoric of this image proposed the deviant pleasure of being ‘politically incorrect’ with force and energy. The old feminist was addressed implicitly, as a woman who sought to limit the pleasures of the ‘rest of us’. Thank goodness, the image seemed to suggest, we can now, once again, enjoy looking at the bodies of beautiful women with impunity. So skilful with the use of postmodern irony was the image, that it also sought to produce a kind of generational divide, the younger female viewer is not made angry, unlike her older counterpart. She appreciates the multiple layers of meaning and she gets the joke. Since then this new kind of sophisticated anti-feminism has become a recurring feature across the landscape of both popular and also political culture. Its distinctive feature is that it upholds the principles of gender equality, while denigrating the figure of the feminist. From the gentle upbraiding of the feminist in Bridget Jones’s Diary, to the rise of lapdancing clubs, to the sexist-in-inverted-comma jokes of Ricky Gervais, Russell Brand, and Jonathan Ross, to hen parties, to proliferation of ‘lads mags’, to the sexualisation of small girls through the rise of fashion and beauty brands targeted at the under 5s, to the retro-styled garden barbeque event like that staged during the Obama visit to the UK in summer 2011, which had in the foreground the wives dressed for the part, and hence traditionally ‘wifely’, to the spectacular and unapologetic hate speech of Berlusconi, who nevertheless also claims to support the careers and ambitions of young glamorous women, while showering older women who challenge him with torrents of verbal abuse, we see something socially significant solidify under the surface of contemporary cultural life.”
I’ve thought about writing something out about this for a while now.
I am constantly seeing pro-kink people defending BDSM with remarks such as - ”How is BDSM misogynistic when there are submissive men and dominant women?”
As someone who was deeply involved in the BDSM community, and who was more specifically, a domme who enacted that domination out solely on men, this is one of the most frustrating defences of BDSM.
First, let me state that just because, in any situation involving misogyny or oppression of any kind, there are instances that seem to go against the grain doesn’t make that a good argument. It also doesn’t make it free of the same critique.
Me being gender critical doesn’t erase your identity and isn’t a call for trans people to be killed. Women are allowed to structurally analyize social theory, regardless of if you agree with them or not. If you can’t tell the difference between political analysis, and a call for a mass extermination, then you probably shouldn’t be given your own political platform.
Anonymous said: why are escorts needed in abortion clinics?
Because pro-lifers have a nasty habit of trying to block women from entering the doors, either by bullying them with revolting and misleading photographs, trying to emotionally coerce them, harassing them and calling them baby-killers, or trying to lead them to “crisis pregnancy centres” that are actually right-wing Christian centres.
There’s also the little-mentioned tendency of pro-life groups to become violent and shoot abortion doctors, so escorts can and do serve as the first line of defence.