Would it be effective censorship if I just photoshopped man nipples onto girl nipples
this is so powerful
I love it
i like books, food, and long walks through hyrule. i get obsessive over people/things and actually followed my best friend nikki all the way to OU. sometimes i cry because daenerys targaryen.
this is not a spoiler-free blog (asoiaf).
FOR USE OF
ADVICE & ASSISTANCE OBTAINABLE IMMEDIATELY
HOVER TO OPEN
Everything Men’s Rights Activists label as “female privilege” is really patriarchy backfiring against men.
The gender-specific rule that men shouldn’t hit women is caused by the misogynistic belief that women are fragile.
The belief that men can’t be raped is caused by the belief that men always want sex and the belief that men must always be strong, which are the same gender norms that enable men to sexually harass women.
The belief that all men are rapists is caused by the misogynistic belief that a woman who is quick to trust a man is asking for it.
The belief that statutory rape is worse with an older man and a younger woman than with an older woman and a younger man is caused by the misogynistic belief that society must protect female virginity.
Custody favoring the mother is caused by the misogynistic belief that taking care of the kids is a woman’s job.
The fact that only men can be drafted is caused by the misogynistic belief that women are too weak for combat. Also, most feminists are against the draft.
The belief that the man must pay for the date is caused by the misogynistic belief that women are helpless and need men to do everything for them, and it’s often used as a way to guilt-trip her into having sex.
Feminists don’t support any of those. All of those are caused by patriarchy. Men’s Rights Activists can stop blaming feminists for the problems that patriarchy causes.
Why boys don’t read girls (sometimes)
When I do book signings, most of my line is made up of young girls with their mothers, teen girls alone, and mother friend groups. But there’s usually at least one boy with a stack of my books. This boy is anywhere from 8-19, he’s carrying a worn stack of the Books of Bayern, and he’s excited and unashamed to be a fan of those books. As I talk to him, 95% of the time I learn this fact: he is home schooled.
There’s something that happens to our boys in school. Maybe it’s because they’re around so many other boys, and the pressure to be a boy is high. They’re looking around at each other, trying to figure out what it means to be a boy—and often their conclusion is to be “not a girl.” Whatever a girl is, they must be the opposite. So a book written by a girl? With a girl on the cover? Not something a boy should be caught reading.
But something else happens in school too. Without even meaning to perhaps, the adults in the boy’s life are nudging the boy away from “girl” books to “boy” books. When I go on tour and do school visits, sometimes the school will take the girls out of class for my assembly and not invite the boys. I talk about reading and how to fall in love with reading. I talk about storytelling and how to start your own story. I talk about things that aren’t gender-exclusive. But because I’m a girl and there are girls on my covers, often I’m deemed a girl-only author. I wonder, when a boy author goes to those schools with their books with boys on the covers, are the girls left behind? I want to question this practice. Even if no boy ever really would like one of my books, by not inviting them, we’re reinforcing the wrong and often-damaging notion that there’s girls-only stuff and you aren’t allowed to like it.
I hear from teachers that when they read Princess Academy in class (by far the most girlie-sounding of all my books) that the boys initially protest but in the end like it as much as the girls, or as one teacher told me recently, “the boys were even bigger fans than the girls.”
Another staple in my signing line is the family. The mom and daughters get their books signed, and the mom confides in me, “My son reads your books on the sly” or “My son loves your books too but he’s embarrassed to admit it.” Why are they embarrassed? Because we’ve made them that way. We’ve told them in subtle ways that, in order to be a real boy, to be manly, they can’t like anything girls like.
Though sometimes those instructions aren’t subtle at all. Recently at a signing, a family had all my books. The mom had me sign one of them for each of her children. A 10-year-old boy lurked in the back. I’d signed some for all the daughters and there were more books, so I asked the boy, “Would you like me to sign one to you?” The mom said, “Yeah, Isaac, do you want her to put your name in a girl book?” and the sisters all giggled.
As you can imagine, Isaac said no.
This is where I feel called to fight sexism. in these moments where girl things are “stupid” for boys.
I can read comics and like superheroes, but he can’t enjoy books with a lead female or like dolls because THAT’S FOR GIRLS AND IT’S LAME.
No. Girl stuff is not lame. It’s just as cool as boy stuff, but sexism has put girl things in a category one step below boy things and that is unacceptable.
I’m taking a class called The Archaeology of Sex and Gender (I’m an anthropology and art history major), and we were studying female figurines from the Neolithic era. Some girl in my class brought up the point that when male figurines with giant phalli were discovered, they were interpreted by academics as symbols of power. When female figures with giant vulvas were discovered, they were interpreted by academics as symbols of fertility. “Why can’t the giant vulva be a symbol of power too?” she asked.
It blew my mind and reaffirmed my decision to study anthropology and art history.
This reminds me of a conversation a friend and I had recently about our work. She’s in the very early stages of writing her dissertation on scribes in early medieval England, specifically female scribes. One of the things we vented about was the universal assumption that men copied the vast majority of manuscripts in the period, when there’s actually very, very little evidence to suggest that level of exclusivity. There are very few manuscripts we know for a fact were copied by men, and most are anonymous. And if you look at the nature of religious institutions in England and the status of women between 700-1000ish,
1.) quite a few monasteries were founded by aristocratic women;
2.) many were dual houses, which housed both male and female religious, and some of those houses were politically influential—and also headed by women—and thus were likely to have access to good libraries;
3.) there is evidence that women in important institutions were reading and writing correspondence in Latin; and
4.) there is also evidence that noble women were patrons of book production and literate themselves (in the vernacular if not in Latin), because wills from the period survive in which women bequeath their libraries to various people. None of this is concrete, but I don’t think it’s a leap to argue that it’s almost just as likely any given anonymous copyist could as easily be a woman as a man. But in manuscript studies, the assumption is always that, unless the text might have some “obvious” interest to women, the copyist is a man. Which is pretty damn ridiculous, and just another reminder that the effacement of women’s contributions to civilization and the transmission (and generation!) of knowledge is an ongoing process of willful forgetting, as well as ignorance.
I can relate to the statues of women with giant reproductive parts being labeled as “degrading” or “fertility” when I thought it represented power.
Basically not everything revolves around 1950’s middle class/Victorian period gender roles people.
The same thing goes in my field (Theology and Biblical Studies) except maybe even more so, because the Bible openly acknowledges women who held a great deal of social and economic power in both the Old and New Testaments- and yet they are routinely glossed over by scholarship and indeed erased in official translations*. We know so comparatively little about Ancient Israel that there’s no overwhelmingly compelling reason to suggest women could not have played a role in the composition of the Tanakh, and the New Testament itself makes explicit the importance of women within the early Christian movement, especially older, educated and wealthy women- so what’s to stop a woman being behind some of the New Testament writings (especially given that so many are disputed in authorship)?
*Easy way to detect if the Bible translation you own has a sexist bias: look up Romans 16:1 and 1 Timothy 3:8. If the former calls Phoebe a “servant” of the church but the latter refers to regulations for “deacons”, congratulations! The translators of your Bible deliberately chose to erase evidence of the ordination of women in the early church! Both verses in fact feature exactly the same word, diakonos, which certainly can mean servant, but is also the word for deacon, an order of Christian ministry that exists to this day.
(via thirdeyeblinking)(via wonderwhale)
What about the part where 69% of Mississippians don’t believe in interracial marriage, or some astounding number who don’t believe in evolution?
Can you say why America is the greatest country in the world?
GPOY to end all GPOY’s. I regret nothing.
The answer is NO.
The “fact” that junk food is cheaper than real food has become a reflexive part of how we explain why so many Americans are overweight, particularly those with lower incomes. I frequently read confident statements like, “when a bag of chips is cheaper than a head of broccoli …” or “it’s more affordable to feed a family of four at McDonald’s than to cook a healthy meal for them at home.”
this bullshit fills me with a very specific kind of rage. so, TIME TO DEBUNK!
- that meal from mcdonalds takes virtually no time to acquire AND is available almost anywhere.
- the second meal? that “salad” is lettuce … with nothing else, not even dressing unless its just olive oil or some milk i guess? gross.
- also thats the price of each serving, not an entire loaf of bread, a bottle of olive oil, etc. that stuff adds up which means you have to have a lot of money at one time to buy it all.
- that meal probably took an hour and a half to make, which is a long fucking time when you work multiple jobs or are caring for a lot of people or dont have help! seriously, if you are a single parent of three who works, is spending an hour and a half every night preparing a meal a likely option?
- same with beans and rice! also, you know whats a fucking bummer? eating beans and rice every night because you are poor. ask any person who has done it and they will tell you (you can start with me).
- there is a “nutrition” argument here that lacks a follow up: poor people are more likely to be doing physical labor and need more than 571 calories per meal.
- you know who is less likely to know how to bake or prepare a chicken? people without access to the internet, or libraries, or who werent taught how to by their parents because their parents worked all the time. access to healthy foods is a classist issue and classism is cyclical, you fucking morons.
- seriously, these sorts of infographics make me want to fucking flip tables. do you know why people don’t eat more fresh fruits and vegetables? because fresh fruits and vegetables are expensive, because they take a long time to prepare, because they dont live near a grocery store that has a decent produce section, because they dont have reliable transportation to get groceries to and from the grocery store, because they dont have the energy to plan all of the shit that is involved in making healthy, intentional, filling, balanced meals. basically: poor people get fucked, and then we get BLAMED for being lazy.
- eating “healthy”, aka access to fresh fruits and vegetables, is a privilege, first, foremost, always. so fuck you new york times and your ignorant goddamn infographic.
- there are SYSTEMATIC REASONS that we do not have equal access to fresh fruits and vegetables. they are very REAL problems. besides, you know, systematic poverty in america, the total mis-distribution of farm subsidies is a perfect place to start. read about that, then either get bent or start working on the actual problem.
YES YES YES YES YES
I am so fucking tired of seeing these misleading as fuck infographics about how “healthy eating is cheap!” No. No it is fucking not.
AND where the FUCK are you getting your food that salt and pepper are 5 cents?!??! or bacon for $1.85? or a CUP of oil for 55 cents? FOUR pieces of bread for 75 cents? 3 cups for rice for 50 cents?
this stuff just doesn’t make sense, is extremely shaming, and is extremely misleading.
Making homemade food affordable and healthy is very important to me, but let’s just point out a few things.
1. If you have very little money, you will *not* be eating Big Macs. You will be ordering off of the dollar menu. Off the dollar menu, that $28 is going to buy me two cheeseburgers, a fries, and a Coke for a family of SEVEN.
OK, six, really, because tax, and the double cheeseburgers are actually $1.19 now, but still. The point remains that I just bought 12 double cheeseburgers, 6 small fries, and 6ea. 16 oz. “small” sodas for about $26 plus tax. Trust me, I’ve actually done this…many times. Hell yes, I’ve dug under the seats of my car for that last nickel to get a $1 double cheeseburger when I had nothing else. Oh, wait, we were serving only four people? OK, so now we’re down to only $18 plus tax. Plus, I get free salt, pepper, ketchup, mustard, barbecue sauce, straws, napkins.
Now remember, each person in the family got TWO double cheeseburgers (that’s four small meat patties, four slices of cheese, and four slices of “bread” (sic), with onions, pickles, ketchup, and mustard, a side of french fries (or *two* apple pies), and two cups (16 oz.) of Coke, because I asked for no ice. No one is going hungry here, and as things go, there are a whole lot of much more unhealthy things they *could* have eaten, instead.
2. And I don’t have to clean up. No soap, no hot water, no dishwasher, no sponges, no dishes, no nothing involved that would be necessary to serve the equivalent at home. You forgot to add the prices of all those things. All the remains get binned.
3. Which means I didn’t have to pay for gas or electricity for my stove to cook this stuff, I didn’t have to pay for power to run the refrigerator, I didn’t have to go shopping for it, I didn’t have to cook it…the list goes on. I think you’re getting the point. And you forgot to add all the prices of those things into the cost of your homemade meal.
4. Do you actually know how much a chicken costs? Let’s say $1.69/lb, which is pretty average in my area for a factory-farmed chicken. Now, the chickens you find out there rarely exceed about 7 lbs, which will be called a “roaster”. Anything you see above that is kind of freakish and is probably going to taste like it grew in a vat, not in a battery cage, but you get my drift. In any case, that’s the size chicken I’m going to need to feed a family of six, and that 7 lb bird is going to cost me…$11.83, not $5.96, as the illustration shows. OK, so the chicken you picked is for four people, so I guess I can get a 4.5 lb bird, instead, for $7.60. Wait, that’s still more money than $5.96. Oh, and can we spice it up with something besides salt and pepper, and *maybe* a squeeze of lemon? That’s pretty boring. For Goddess’ sake, pick up a box of Bell’s Poultry Seasoning, and a head of garlic!
5. That salad? Does it contain anything other than lettuce? I guess I have to make a vinaigrette out of oil, lemon, salt, and pepper, too? Good thing for you, I know how to cook. It’s still going to be a pretty boring salad…but whatevs, I’ll let you slide on that one.
6. One quart of milk? That’s half the volume of drinks I got at Micky D’s, hon. Better make it two quarts. Wait, scratch that, I’m Asian, and my family is lactose intolerant. Try again.
OK, I think you’re starting to get the picture. There’s more to food security, cooking, health, nutrition, food access, and money than meets the eye. I forgive you. After all, I’ve got actual experience at doing all of these things, so I have a visceral understanding of all the processes involved. Maybe now you have a little bit more insight into it, as well.
Umm Gemma can we please just elect you Queen of the World because this is literally everything I wanted to say but didn’t and yes, sweet jesus, yes.
Thank you from all of us who have been there and regularly find sugar packets in their pockets to attest to it.
yeah wow fuck this little infograph thing.
Reblogged for the amazing added commentary.
Love seeing these stupid posters debunked. And, uh, at what grocery store can I buy four pieces of sandwich bread or a half cup of olive oil?
Lately I’ve been trying to cook and eat at home more often. It is more economical in the long run (compared to going out to eat in general, not just getting McDonald’s) and probably better for me than the glue-like Lean Cuisines I’ve been subsisting on at work. BUT. It is a luxury to have a full kitchen and almost every pot, pan and appliance under the sun (which were wedding gifts - another luxury). It is a luxury to have enough money to buy a whole chicken (last one I bought was 4 lbs and cost $7) and loaves of whole-wheat bread ($3.89 at Target) and fresh ingredients. It is a luxury that I work normal hours and don’t have kids or other pressing responsibilities to take care of when I get home, so I can spend a couple hours cooking in the evening when the mood strikes me.
Instead of making food-shaming posters, maybe we should focus on making these luxuries more accessible to impoverished American families. Just maybe.
Thing that is cool: preaching body positivity and advocating for a society that is more accepting of all shapes and sizes
Thing that is not cool: shaming women who are thin/skinny/lean/whatever because they are not “real women”
Thing that is cool: providing support for all women who are going through body image issues no matter their size, shape or social status
Thing that is not cool: presuming that women who are thin/famous/rich/whatever do not suffer from body image issues
Thing that is cool: recognizing that all women, regardless of shape, size or status, suffer from a society that promotes ridiculous and unattainable standards of beauty
Thing that is not cool: Telling a woman who fits into the societal idea of “attractive” that she has no right to complain about or even have body image issues
Thing that is cool: Telling a woman who is suffering from body image issues that she is beautiful the way she is and complimenting her on the qualities she has
Thing that is not cool: Telling a woman that she is “lucky” to look the way that she looks, or saying, “Wow, if YOU’RE fat/ugly/whatever then what am I?!”
Thing that is cool: Supporting women in whatever (safe) ways they use to enhance their appearance or feel more confident about their body
Thing that is not cool: Hating on women who use makeup, shapewear, hair dye, hair removal products, plastic surgery, botox, etc.
Thing that is cool: Promoting the idea of body acceptance and positivity to those who are struggling with body image issues
Thing that is not cool: Shaming women who struggle to accept or be positive about their bodies and tell them that they’re buying into a negative society
BDSM isn’t anti-feminism, but hating on it is.
omg seriously pads and tampons should be free to all
womenwho need them because it’s not something we want to buy and they’re so ridiculously expensive we’re down like 20 bucks every month which adds to about $240 a year and we have to spend it and guyspeople without vaginas don’t and it’s not our fault so they should be free
We should just stop buying them and bleed on everything they love
We should just stop buying them and bleed on everything they love
fixed it (i think)
yes, i get it, jennifer lawrence is attractive and she’s so down-to-earth and likable and she’s talented and smart
last month it was emma. last week it was rooney. this week it’s jennifer. lol
absolutelyiris asked: I’m terrified by 1. the amount of people that are actually offended and upset that Rue is black, and 2. the amount of people who obviously don’t know how to read. I fear for the future, I really do.
I fear for the future as well. Isn’t this stuff unbelievable?
Here’s what scares me…
All these… people… read the Hunger Games. Clearly, they all fell in love with and cared about Rue. Though what they really fell in love with was an image of Rue that they’d created in their minds. A girl that they knew they could love and adore and mourn at the thought of knowing that she’s been brutally killed.
And then the casting is revealed (or they go see the movie) and they’re shocked to see that Rue is black. Now… this is so much more than, “Oh, she’s bigger than I thought”. The reactions are all based on feelings of disgust.
These people are MAD that the girl that they cried over while reading the book was “some black girl” all along. So now they’re angry. Wasted tears, wasted emotions. It’s sad to think that had they known that she was black all along, there would have been no sorrow or sadness over her death.
There are MAJOR TIE-INS to these reactions and the injustices that we see around the world today. I don’t even need to spell it out because I know that you’re all a smart bunch.
This is a BIG problem. Think of all the murdered children. Think of all the missing children that get NO SCREEN TIME on the news.
It is NOT a coincidence.
THIS is the purpose of my blog… and to also point out shitty reading comprehension. LOL