#Gender equality

[animentality]

[heterorealism]

Truck comes first and if there is any money left over the kids may eat. - Modern Consumer Patriarchy

[socialjusticeinamerica]

[she-is-ovarit]

Gen Z/many liberal fauxminists are too young to remember how mainstream liberal feminism on the internet actually started.

The internet culture for what you now call social justice was, overwhelmingly, feminists versus MRAs. There was barely any gay rights conversations going on (which did grow over time), and gender identity as a concept seriously did not exist online. There was zero conversations about gender identity this or gender that.

It was men's rights activists arguing that women have it better, women oppress men, social issues like domestic violence actually are covering up that men are really the victims, etc. Think of this platfom seriously being splintered as MRAs versus who you currently label as terfs. Those were the two large warring populations for years.

Then, MRAs started pushing this concept of egalitarianism. Egalitarianism became popular. That looked like "well men and women both suffer, but especially men" and "the goal shouldn't be women's rights it should be egalitarianism". What eventually happened was the slightly younger population of girls for the first time joining the internet and finding their way to feminist discussions slightly conceded and started arguing from the perspective of "feminist egalitarianism" and identifying as such, arguing from the perspective of equal treatment of men and women while still recognizing that women suffer under patriarchy.

And that's essentially how "gender equality/lipstick feminism" originated on the internet and it's a load of shit. The MRAs essentially won in maintaining the status quo, because mainstream "feminists" no longer are recognizing that males are treated as the default, standard for equality. That male supremacist ideas, male culture, and male treatment of women are considered the neutral baseline. Women not being considered oppressed at all ("men are equally oppressed too!") is normalized. Feminism shifting away from women and equally onto men to benefit their current power structure isn't feminism or really even egalitarianism—it's the male oppressor class taking control.

[arielthedaydreamer]

I don't know who needs to hear this, but: If you're a man -whether you've been one all your life or just recently started to notice within yourself the need to become one- that's enough.

You don't have to pass a test, there is no quiz, you don't have to check a minimum amount of gender role boxes. No one can tell you HOW to be a man. It doesn't matter how you look or how your body looks, how you talk, how you act, how you behave, what your sexuality is. You don't even have to fit in with the other guys. If being a man feels right for you, you can say "This is me and I'm a man".

The gender police will never knock on your door. Your gender is your own business and no one else's. No one can tell you what a man can or can't do. There is no wrong way to be a man. Be the kind of man you want to be, the kind that sparks joy. You can do it, bro. I believe in you.

[sandu7174]

Stop gender-based censorship.

To allow male chests and censor female chests is an act of misogyny. Simple as that. So let's stop it and start treating everyone with equal respect and dignity, regardless of your gender identity or body type.

🤍Reblogs are appreciated!🤍

[hoefortoes1]

I think one of the most horrific things patriarchy has done is pitting women against each other. I grew up hearing the phrase " aik aurat hi aurat ki dushman hoti hai" and sadly majority of women still hold this belief as this has been pushed down our throats for decades. Meanwhile, men follow the "bro code" so strictly that they defend their "boys" even when they're in the wrong.

[ijustgotherebro]

We stan couples who would throw hands for each other!

[thererisesaredstar]

Deungdae issue about female machinists (1964)

[mapsontheweb]

Countries where there is not a single woman in government.

by geo.universe

[reasonsforhope]

"Spain’s Catalonia region rolled out a pioneering women’s health initiative [at the beginning of March, 2024] that offers reusable menstruation products for free.

About 2.5 million women, girls, transgender and nonbinary people who menstruate can receive one menstrual cup, one pair of underwear for periods and two packages of cloth pads at local pharmacies in northeast Spain free of charge.

The Catalan government said that the initiative, which is called “My period, my rules,” was meant to “guarantee the right to menstrual equity.” The regional government cited statistics that said 23% of women polled by Catalonia’s public opinion office said they had reused hygiene products designed for a single use for economic reasons.

Tània Verge, Catalonia’s regional minister for equality and feminism, called the program a “global first.”

Scotland’s government passed a law in 2020 to ensure period products are available for free to anyone who needs them. But in comparison with the Catalan program, in Scotland the products are for single use and are distributed through schools, colleges and universities, not pharmacies.

“We are fighting menstrual poverty, which affects one in four women in Catalonia, but is also about gender justice. We are fighting the stereotypes and taboos about menstruation,” Verge told The Associated Press. “And (...) it is about climate justice. We need to reduce the tons of waste generated by single-use menstrual products.”

The distribution of reusable products is also aimed at reducing waste. The regional government said that Catalonia produces about 9,000 tons of waste from single-use menstrual hygiene products.

The reusable products are acquired by the public health care system, which covers the entire population, and distributed by Catalonia’s 3,000-plus private pharmacies. The program cost the regional government 8.5 million euros ($9.2 million).

“I am completely in favor of this initiative,” 29-year-old graphic designer Laura Vilarasa said. “It will give women a product that is absolutely necessary to have for zero cost.”

Spain’s national government passed a law last year granting women with debilitating menstrual pain the right to paid medical leave."

-via AP News, March 5, 2024

[ivygorgon]

[girl4music]

“But I can tell you this, Xena… you’re the only constant in my life, and unless you know something I don’t, I’m not going anywhere. So I’m going to say the most selfish thing I’ve ever said to you: that baby’s my baby too, and I deserve a chance to fight for it as much as you.”

- Gabrielle, ‘Them Bones, Them Bones’ (Original script dialogue.)

They knew what they were doing with this scene. Especially the way Xena AND Gabrielle’s heads turn back to the baby at exactly the same time as if they were both proud of making that little bundle of joy between their arms. Also notice how Gabrielle only steps away after a glance towards Xena and Eve, clearly assessing that they both need to be alone while she responds to Hercules' request. As if to say "You stay here, I'll take care of business."

Dialogue is rarely ever needed between these two because the body language communicates so much in small intimate scenes like this. Both the mark of great acting and great chemistry between the actresses. I've always said that it's the quiet moments that truly reveal the depth of the loving relationship between Xena and Gabrielle. Whether you see it in a romantic way or not, you cannot deny that it is not filled with unconditional love. Especially where Gabrielle is concerned.

In fact...

I'm reminded of what Ares says in the ice cave in confession to what he believes to be a dead Xena about the dichotomy between his love for Xena and Gabrielle's love for Xena.

"You're with her now. I handled you all wrong. I know that. She knew what you needed - unconditional and unselfish love - and I couldn't give that to you. But I appreciated you in ways she never could. Your rage, your violence, your beauty. When you sacrificed yourself for others, you were hers. But when you kicked ass, you were mine. I love you, Xena."

- Ares, ‘Looking Death In The Eye’.

And I back up what I say in my character study thesis. The reason why Gabrielle won Xena's affection every time wasn't just because she was good at that moment. It's because she was given a CHOICE to be good in EVERY moment. Ares never offered her that choice. It was always "be mine, or die". Gabrielle always did - she would just take herself out of the picture if Xena chose evil or stand against her.

Such a striking difference is often not spoken about in this love triangle the writers obviously intended between Xena, Gabrielle and Ares. It says that the show never really went one way or the other on the romance not just because it couldn't... But because it didn't have to. There was importance in keeping the romance balanced although many wouldn't admit to it and would rather just complain about it instead. As for me, I think it's one of the most groundbreaking things about it. Rob was definetly right about keeping it this way and I back him up on it 100%. We knew that Gabrielle had Xena's heart. However, the conflict in Xena's heart would always remain because Ares would always be around to remind her of her former life. And in so doing this, we learn that Xena could never be definitively one way or the other either. This is what made her character so damn dynamic. And why it was leagues ahead of its time in queer representation. Even today, a bisexual narrative like this is never done. Or rather - it’s done but it’s never written this well. It’s never connected to the major narratives and themes. And that’s because the queer characters are never the major characters. They’re never the actual narrative. Instead, the queer characters have to wrap around it. And that’s the wrong way of going about doing this.

I don’t care what anyone says.

Gabby was the daddy.

Or the other mother, if you prefer. Although, I would definetly say Gabrielle’s role was typically that of a father. I don’t like gender norms, roles and stereotypes either but that doesn’t mean those are off-limits to a woman.

I’ve said before that the fact Gabrielle was depicted as doing the “typical father” role means the writers were abolishing the belief that only a man can do it and therefore using gender norms, roles and stereotypes as a way to promote equality and solidarity.

If you have a problem with me calling Gabrielle the “father” of Eve, you have to understand I am speaking from the point of view they would have in their time. There was no such thing as a same-sex couple in Ancient Greece in the sense that they could marry and have children without the participation of a male figure. Of course gay couples would exist but would not be socially accepted. Hell, it wasn’t even socially accepted a decade ago. What makes you think it was then? So me referring to Gabrielle as that male figure in Eve’s life should be seen as a compliment, not an insult. I’m saying she had the capability to fill that role and she wasn’t even a man. Just like how Xena could fill the role of a warlord and she wasn’t a man. Can’t you see that I am giving them respect as people who can take on both the feminine and masculine side of situations? Xena and Gabrielle were human anomalies and that’s bloody awesome as far as I’m concerned. I wish more shows today had that kind of gender roles representation with their characters. Sadly, they don’t.

[sagegreenyaps]

If I had 25 cents for every time I've exploded a radfem's talking points by bringing up the dangers of benevolent sexism, making them resort to fear-mongering and martyring themselves, I would actually have a dollar.

Go research benevolent sexism, y'all.

(Note: I'm muting this post because pro-sexism radfems would rather deflect than acknowledge things and risk destroying their entire destructive worldview).

[she-is-ovarit]

"All inclusive" as it operates today isn't a concept born from the women's movement, civil rights movement, or gay rights movement—it's origins are in the MRA (men's rights activism) "egalitarianism" push in the early 2000s, which was an anti-feminist movement.

And this adoption of "all inclusive" is so similar to the "all lives matter" movement in the sense that it is in direct opposition to women attempting to discuss issues that disproportionately effect us in the axis of sex.

It's the "no sex but the human sex" spinoff to "no race but the human race".

It's not bad to have neutral groups or spaces where everyone is involved, but it's destructive when groups, events, and spaces centered on an oppressed population (including female human beings) are bullied away for not including everybody.

When everything ever becomes "all-inclusive" it is the ideology and culture of the population with the most power and social influence—the oppressor class—that dominates as the default.

Have your online discussions that focus on both men and women, but in addition to this we also need established environments that not only welcome but encourage discussions about how different forms of male violence and coercive control exploit women on the axis of sex without hearing shit about "all genders are welcome here!".

Have your "all-inclusive LGBTQ" bars and events but we also need areas where strictly gay men and lesbian women can freely be and resources that focus specifically on us.

Stop tearing down lesbian bars and women's centers we attempt to construct just simply because it doesn't include you—that is what MRAs and Christian homophobes do.

"All inclusive" is exclusionary to oppressed groups when it's the only option for spaces, resources, and perspectives of discussion because it operates a cultural form of assimilation, erasure, and coercive control.