Now Playing Tracks

starlingsongs:

So last night Anita Sarkeesian published the latest Feminist Frequency video on misogyny in video games and received another wave of death threats, this time including one of terrifying specificity, demonstrating knowledge of where she and several of her family members lived, compelling her to contact the authorities and leave her home.

A threat intended, of course, to demonstrate that there is no misogyny directed at women involved in video games, and that her video series is unnecessary man hating slander.

You know what makes me angry, though? The death threat is horrible, but what makes me mad is that in the comments section for every site on the net for so-called “games journalists”, there will be mountains of posts that begin something along the lines of “that’s so horrible and i can’t believe anyone would do something so bad, /HOWEVERRRRR/, i don’t know if there’s really a misogyny problem blah blah blah her videos are so controvercial blah blah blah maybe if she hadn’t blah blah blah i don’t see why you females are all so mad at me im just stating an opinion blah blah blah but i’m an ally blah blah blah you all just hate men blah blah blah fart”

For every one guy who’s sociopathic and cruel enough to send hate mail to a woman for speaking out in her sisters’ defense, there are a THOUSAND perfectly willing to be tone-deaf apologists for a culture of violence against women, usually riding in on the dead, beaten horse that is the maybe-the-truth-is-in-the-middle non-analysis.

In the 1890s, when Freud was in the dawn of his career, he was struck by how many of his female patients were revealing childhood [sexual] victimization to him. Freud concluded that child sexual abuse was one of the major causes of emotional disturbances in adult women and wrote a brilliant and humane paper called “The Aetiology of Hysteria.” However, rather than receiving acclaim from his colleagues for his ground-breaking insights, Freud met with scorn. He was ridiculed for believing that men of excellent reputation (most of his patients came from upstanding homes) could be perpetrators of incest.
Within a few years, Freud buckled under this heavy pressure and recanted his conclusions. In their place he proposed the “Oedipus complex,” which became the foundation of modern psychology… Freud used this construct to conclude that the episodes of abuse his clients had revealed to him had never taken place; they were simply fantasies of events the women had wished for… This construct started a hundred-year history in the mental health field of blaming victims for the abuse perpetrated on them and outright discrediting of women’s and children’s reports of mistreatment by men.

― Lundy Bancroft

(via proletarianprincess)

read this carve it into your brains permanently etch it into your skulls r e a d  t h i s

(via miss-mizi)

(Source: womensliberationfront)

mcxi:

anotherboywholived:

feministbackup:

If you haven’t heard about this yet, last night the BBC aired a powerful documentary called Blurred Lines that explored casual misogyny online and rape culture.

I urge EVERYONE to watch it and spread it like fire because it gives real insight into the topic and has inspired both men and women to go to Twitter and had #blurredlines trending for 12 hours on Twitter after it aired.

You can watch it on BBC iPlayer here (x)

(I genuinely don’t know if those outside the UK can view, so please let me know!)

It includes video footage from the Steubenville cases, it takes a look at the treatment of women in GTA, lads mags and rape jokes, the unapologetic nature of those who perpetrate rape culture etc.

One of the more interesting points of the documentary are the men who oppose rape culture and those that don’t and the societal differences between them.

After you view it please share your views, both on Tumblr and any other social media platforms you have. It’d be great if this abuse against women documentary were the first searches people came across when they search for Blurred lines.

You can watch it on BBC iPlayer here (x)

For those outside the UK: there’s a nice browser extension called Hola with which you can watch this.

And here’s a link to the whole program on YouTube.  [x]

fallen-inspiration:

theholyfoot:

If you want to help secure the rights of women all over the world go here.
If you want to help people from north korea go here.
If you want to help stop child labor go here
If you want to help people escape from their current situation go here
If you want to help refugees reunite with their families go here

If you want to permanently help the people who are still living in inhumane conditions all over the globe, that grow up experiencing war, violence and discrimination, be political! Go vote, write articles, educate every single person you meet, never shut your mouth, make people aware of the fact that we are still far away from global equality, freedom and peace.  

Please do not remove this caption, if you repost, link back to this post.

This is important.

So I ask the American commentators, please stop announcing that Landon Donovan is the “all-time U.S. leading goal scorer.” He is not. With 57 international goals, he’s not even in the Top Five.

The all-time U.S. leading goal scorer is Abby Wambach, with 167 goals, followed by Mia Hamm (158), Kristine Lilly (130), Michelle Akers (105) and Tiffeny Milbrett (100). In fact, Abby Wambach is the all-time leading goal scorer in the world, among all soccer players, male or female.
World Cup Soccer Stats Erase The Sport’s Most Dominant Players: Women (via cypher2)

(Source: thewhatup)

the-goddamazon:

basicallyfrench:

letsflytoparis:

247muslima:

THIS

WHERE IS THIS FROM ?

It’s from “la source des femmes”

IT’S TRUE.

THERE IS NOTHING IN THE QU’RAN THAT SAYS WOMEN’S SOLE PURPOSE IS FOR OBEYING AND PROCREATING.

We are allowed to inherit and own property and businesses, and we are allowed to CHOOSE our husbands instead of having them foisted upon us in arranged marriages. WE ARE ALSO ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE IN COMBAT.

I’ve read the Qu’ran COVER TO COVER and there’s nothing God says about women being LESS than men. In fact, God IMPLORES men to treat women as equals. Probably because God knew men have a tendency to foul things up and has to remind them that WOMEN ARE ALSO PRECIOUS CREATIONS OF HIS DIVINE WILL.

-huffs and puffs-

Sorry. I was in my feelings. But this touches my nerves a lot when people misinterpret Islam as some misogynistic religion. Nothing could be further from the truth.

(Source: qawiya)

it-grrl:

princess-slay-ya:

My most popular post has received a lot of arguments lately, so I figured I’d respond to the most common points people bring up.

Sources:

Carrie Fisher on her costumes 

what supermodels wear in hell

 on Padme’s wardrobe 

to get a general gist of Queen Jamillia’s and Oola’s screen time, here are the scripts for Attack of the Clones (Jamillia is in 359 word scene) and Return of the Jedi (Oola is in scenes that add up to 275 words)

Star Wars Bechedel Test results  here

We are old enough to know we deserve more.

tamorapierce:

doctorscienceknowsfandom:

anatsuno:

navalenigma:

shayvaalski:

friendlycloud:

agewa:

“We went to Kineshma, that’s in Ivanovo region, to visit his parents. I went as a heroine and I never expected someone to welcome me, a front-line girl, like that. We’ve gone through so much, we’ve saved lives, lifes of mothers, wives. And then… I heard accusations, I was bad-mouthed. Before that I’ve only ever been “dear sister”… We had tea and my husband’s mother took him aside and started crying: “Who did you marry? A front-line girl… You have two younger sisters. Who’s going to marry them now?” When I think back to that moment I feel tears welling up. Imagine: I had a record, I loved it a lot. There was a song, it said: you have the right to wear the best shoes. That was about a front-line girl. I had it playing, and [his?] elder sister came up and broke it apart, saying: you have no rights. They destroyed all my photos from the war… We, front-line girls, went through so much during hte war… and then we had another war. Another terrible war. The men left us, they didn’t cover our backs. Not like at the front.” from С.Алексеевич “У войны не женское лицо”

In Soviet Union women participating in WWII were erased from history, remaining as the occasional anecdote of a female sniper or simply as medical staff or, at best, radio specialists. The word “front-line girl” (frontovichka) became a terrible insult, synonimous to “whore”. Hundreds thousand of girls who went to war to protect their homeland with their very lives, who came back injured or disabled, with medals for valor, had to hide it to protect themselves from public scorn. 

This has always happened in history: Women do something important. Then they get shamed for it (so nobody will talk about it) and it gets erased from history.

And then certain men will say: “Women suck, they’ve never done anything important.”

Look into history and learn that women have played a far greater role then douches (present and past) wanted you to know.

Hey Will (and Jack) I got you something.

So this is important. Let me tell you a story.

All the time I spend debating about women in combat, I’ve picked up on a trend that disturbs me. Supporting or attacking, people are quick to draw on biology, psychology, law, but very rarely - almost never - do I hear about the history of women in combat, and the evidence their service lends to this debate.

Hundreds of thousands of women faced combat in WW2, and on both sides, and on all fronts, and it is a history that has been almost completely erased from contemporary awareness. I have been given arguments about how women can not psychologically handle combat. And about how women in mixed-gender combat units will automatically disrupt group cohesion - the brotherhood, if you will. Both of these assertions are erasure.

Women have not lived in a protective bubble untouched by combat for all of history. Women have been killed, wounded, and captured in combat, and tortured after. We are not living a world where these are hypothetical situations women have yet to prove they can handle. Unfortunately, they have, they can, in the future, they probably will, again and again. Soviet women served as partisans, snipers, tank drivers, fighter pilots, bombers. And more.

Both British and American women served in mixed-gender AA units. I could drag you through several examples of British women performing exemplarily despite being wounded, or seeing their comrades die. The Luftwaffe did not discriminate. Between the British and the Americans, it was determined that mixed gender units actually performed much better than all male units, because of teamwork. Because women are better and certain tasks, men are better at certain tasks, and at other tasks they are comparably efficient, and in a team, hopefully, in combat, you let the best do what they are best at. For the most part, they were proud to serve together. 

German propaganda never commented on the British AA units, but they thoroughly smeared the Soviet fighting woman - flitenweiber. People often argue with me that women are a threat to group cohesion because men naturally give women preferential treatment. Which certainly explains why men are more likely to survive shipwrecks. And history shows us that Germans soldiers had no chivalrous compunction when it came to shooting captured Soviet women who were armed.

We’re fed a history of war that almost exclusively features white male figures, most of whom fit into this destructive constructed myth of the soldier that is somehow both chivalrous and charmingly womanizing and who’s sense of brotherhood is unshakably dependent on the band being all man. There is no history of woman at war, none. I hear a lot about how women have no upper body strength, I hear nothing about the Front-Line Female Comrade.

THE WORD FRONTOVICHKA BECAME A TERRIBLE INSULT - are you fucking kidding me? Fuck, that made me cry. At first when I started reading I thought I was reading alernate history fiction. I’m ashamed to be ignorant about this, and full of rage and much worse bitter shame that this history is constantly repressed, suppressed, hidden. WHAT THE FUCK. D: D: D:

I didn’t know that bit about the AA (Anti-Aircraft) units.

And even in this article I don’t see a mention of the women of the Israeli Army, or women of the resistance if we’re just sticking to WWII.  I didn’t know about the Russian soldiers, only the fighter pilots, the night witches, and I’ve spent years poking into the corners of history trying to find women who will serve as ammunition when men tell me women can’t fight. 

The best explanation I’ve heard of what happened to women after WWII comes from “A League of Their Own,” the publicist’s character: “What is this—the war is over, Rosie, turn in your rivets?”  Women all over the world had to step into the same old ruts.

I don’t think it’s any mistake at all that Betty Friedan wrote her ground-breaking text for the second wave of feminism, THE FEMININE MYSTIQUE, just 10 years after WWII, after women had dined on a full plate of the same old, same old.

And shame on the men who never stood up for the women who worked and fought beside them, and saved their lives.

(Source: castel-coronado)

A thought experiment: Imagine how people might react if Taylor Swift released an album made up entirely of songs about wishing she could get back together with one of her exes.

We’d hear things like: “She can’t let go. She’s clingy. She’s irrational. She’s crazy.” Men would have a field day comparing her to their own “crazy” exes.

Yet when Robin Thicke released “Paula” – a plea for reconciliation with his ex-wife Paula Patton disguised as an LP — he was called incoherent, obsessed, heartfelt and, in particular, creepy.

But you didn’t hear men calling him “crazy” — even though he used it as the title of one of tracks.

No, “crazy” is typically held in reserve for women’s behavior. Men might be obsessed, driven, confused or upset. But we don’t get called “crazy” — at least not the way men reflexively label women as such.

“Crazy” is one of the five deadly words guys use to shame women into compliance. The others: Fat. Ugly. Slutty. Bitchy. They sum up the supposedly worst things a woman can be.

WHAT WE REALLY MEAN BY “CRAZY” IS: “SHE WAS UPSET, AND I DIDN’T WANT HER TO BE.”

“Crazy” is such a convenient word for men, perpetuating our sense of superiority. Men are logical; women are emotional. Emotion is the antithesis of logic. When women are too emotional, we say they are being irrational. Crazy. Wrong.

Women hear it all the time from men. “You’re overreacting,” we tell them. “Don’t worry about it so much, you’re over-thinking it.” “Don’t be so sensitive.” “Don’t be crazy.” It’s a form of gaslighting — telling women that their feelings are just wrong, that they don’t have the right to feel the way that they do. Minimizing somebody else’s feelings is a way of controlling them. If they no longer trust their own feelings and instincts, they come to rely on someone else to tell them how they’re supposed to feel.

Small wonder that abusers love to use this c-word. It’s a way of delegitimizing a woman’s authority over her own life.

Most men (#notallmen, #irony) aren’t abusers, but far too many of us reflexively call women crazy without thinking about it. We talk about how “crazy girl sex” is the best sex while we also warn men “don’t stick it in the crazy.” How I Met Your Mother warned us to watch out for “the crazy eyes” and how to process women on the “Crazy/Hot” scale. When we talk about why we broke up with our exes, we say, “She got crazy,” and our guy friends nod sagely, as if that explains everything.


Except what we’re really saying is: “She was upset, and I didn’t want her to be.”

Many men are socialized to be disconnected from our emotions — the only manly feelings we’re supposed to show are stoic silence or anger. We’re taught that to be emotional is to be feminine. As a result, we barely have a handle on our own emotions — meaning that we’re especially ill-equipped at dealing with someone else’s.

That’s where “crazy” comes in. It’s the all-purpose argument ender. Your girlfriend is upset that you didn’t call when you were going to be late? She’s being irrational. She wants you to spend time with her instead of out with the guys again? She’s being clingy. Your wife doesn’t like the long hours you’re spending with your attractive co-worker? She’s being oversensitive.

As soon as the “crazy” card is in play, women are put on the defensive. It derails the discussion from what she’s saying to how she’s saying it. We insist that someone can’t be emotional and rational at the same time, so she has to prove that she’s not being irrational. Anything she says to the contrary can just be used as evidence against her.

More often than not, I suspect, most men don’t realize what we’re saying when we call a woman crazy. Not only does it stigmatize people who have legitimate mental health issues, but it tells women that they don’t understand their own emotions, that their very real concerns and issues are secondary to men’s comfort. And it absolves men from having to take responsibility for how we make others feel.

In the professional world, we’ve had debates over labels like “bossy” and “brusque,” so often used to describe women, not men. In our interpersonal relationships and conversations, “crazy” is the adjective that needs to go.

Men really need to stop calling women crazy - Harris O’Malley (via hello-lilianab)

I remember when my dad would try to explain that his ex-wife was crazy, and guys would be like “yeah man, mine too!” And he would get really frustrated like “oh your ex-wife was SO CRAZY AND IRRATIONAL because she… didn’t want you going to bars? Yeah dude my ex tried to drive off a bridge with all our kids in the car because she thought I was stealing their souls with satanic rituals GET SOME PERSPECTIVE HERE.”

(Source: Washington Post)

We make Tumblr themes