Spinster-in-Training

My pronouns are John/Jacob/Jingleheimer Schmidt

womensliberationfront:

Liberal vs. Radical Feminism on gender, in a nutshell.

In her book, “Against Our Will”, Susan Brownmiller has a chapter where she looks at what happens to men who are raped in prison. The answer: they often become “feminine” - masochistic, “soft”, delicate etc.

Femininity is internalized abuse. It is the psychology and disposition of a masochist. It is ritualized submission.

It is seen as clearly pathological and unhealthy when manifested in men - those human beings who matter, who are entitled to real dignity. When manifested in women, it is considered “natural” - a reflection of what women really, innately are.

Abolish gender. Women and girls deserve nothing less.

(via hedonisticparadise)

It is difficult to be sat on all day, every day, by some other creature, without forming an opinion on them.

On the other hand, it is perfectly possible to sit all day, every day, on top of another creature and not have the slightest thought about them whatsoever.

—   

Douglas Adams

this quote was literally in my sociology book 

(via marinashutup)

(via baronvonblitz)

jettgrrrl:

Gender non conforming women are not men, they do not need to transition into men just because they do not fit the expectations of “woman”.

(via respexual)

“Women are workers, as well as the means of reproduction. Lower-class women are especially likely to do hard physical labor. So the problem becomes: How to make sure female strength is used for work but not for rebellion? The answer is: Make women ashamed of it. Though hard work requires lower-class women to be stronger than their upper-class sisters, for example, those strong women are made to envy and imitate the weakness of women who “belong” to, and are the means of reproduction for upper-class men — and so must be kept even more physically restricted if the lines of race and inheritance are to be kept “pure.””

The Light in Her Eyes (2011)

(Source: slumkitty, via knightwitch)

“[WARNING: discussion of male sexual coercion, attempts to “correct” lesbian sexuality]

The unpublished memoirs of Floyd Dell, who became [Edna St. Vincent] Millay’s first male lover in Greenwich Village, give some insight into how women who came to the Village as lesbians were sometimes steered toward heterosexuality in this “progressive” atmosphere. For weeks Millay had agreed to go to bed with Dell, since she was taught in the Village that free bohemian women should have no scruples against such things; but she was obviously ambivalent, insisting they remain fully clothed and refusing to have intercourse. Finally Dell pressured her sufficiently to make her overcome her reluctance. “I know your secret,” he said. “You are still a virgin. You have merely had homosexual affairs with girls in college,” devaluing such relationships as a mature sexual experience. Dell claims that Millay was astonished at his deductive powers and she admitted, “No man has ever found me out before.” In her chagrin she gave in to him. Dell’s memoirs indicate that he was one of the early lesbian-smashers. He says he made love to her, feeling that it was his “duty to rescue her.” His rescue was obviously imperfect, however, since she was still having affairs with women years later when she took up with Thelma Wood, the woman who also became Djuna Barnes’ lover and her model for Robin in Nightwood. Dell finally had to admit with disappointment that Millay could not be entirely rescued. Years after their relationship, he lamented in an interview, “It was impossible to understand [Millay]… . I’ve often thought she may have been fonder of women than of men.” But despite this cognizance of her feelings about women he believed he had right on his side when he proselytized for heterosexuality, and he was encouraged in his conviction by the bohemians who scoffed at the technical virginity of women whose erotic lives were exclusively with other women.

Dell even urged Millay to undergo psychoanalysis in order to “overcome” her interest in women, although she thought analysis silly and, with a feminist awareness developed in her all-women college environment, saw Freudian ideas as nothing but “a Teutonic attempt to lock women up in the home and restore them to cooking and baby-tending.” Yet despite her various attempts to resist, she appears to have succumbed to the pressure. She married, although it was to a man who, she claimed, left her relatively free to behave as she pleased. She said of her life with her husband that they “lived like two bachelors.” But to have chosen to live as a lesbian, even in the world of Greenwich Village, was too problematic for her, despite her history of love for other women.”

—   

Lillian Faderman, Odd Girls and Twilight Lovers: A History of Lesbian Life in Twentieth-Century America (via jeanralphiovaljean)

(via the-hairy-heterophobe)

(Source: partysoft, via plansfornigel)

radbabyradfem:

Pornography so clearly demonstrates how capitalism relies on violence against women, especially WoC and same-sex attracted women. It is an industry that profits from the exploitation, fetishisation, and violence against women.

Pornography is one reason why males conflate violence against women with sex; in pornography, women are ~turned on~ when they are abused and denigrated.

I don’t understand how people can defend such an industry that subjugates and violates women, for profit. 

“Sooner or later, even the most intellectual discussion came down to men’s supposedly superior strength as a justification for inequality, whether the person arguing regretted or celebrated it. What no one seemed to explore, however, was the inadequacy of physical strength as a way of explaining oppression in other cases. Men of European origin hadn’t ruled in South Africa because they were stronger than African men, and blacks hadn’t been kept in slavery or bad jobs in the United States because whites had more muscles. On the contrary, males of the “wrong” class or color were often confined to laboring positions precisely because of their supposedly greater strength, just as the lower pay females received was often rationalized by their supposedly lesser strength. Oppression has no logic — just a self-fulfilling prophecy, justified by a self-perpetuating system.”

“Boys are not circumcised as a ritualized means way of suppressing their future sexual enjoyment, nor does a clean male circumcision compare with the often crude, blunt and often unsanitary practice of female genital mutilation. The World Health Organization calls FGM “a violation of the human rights of girls and women” with consequences that include “severe pain, shock, hemorrhage (bleeding), tetanus or sepsis (bacterial infection), urine retention, open sores in the genital region and injury to nearby genital tissue,” while it in contrast notes “There is compelling evidence that male circumcision reduces the risk of heterosexually acquired HIV infection in men by approximately 60%.””

—   

Alan Cumming’s Fight Against Circumcision 

Equating circumcision with female genital mutilation is simply inaccurate

(via thegendercritic)

(via plansfornigel)