#sexism sex equality justice feminism equality freedom

[sissypan]

Just a point of view...

When I have some free time, I sometimes check the blogs of some friends. I see that many of them are preoccupied by various social issues. The ones about children and about sexism and feminism attract my attention more - obviously I have a greatest interest in this kind of issue than in political stuff. Unfortunately, and even though I see many interesting articles, I have no time to discuss on line. I thought I would write a few general things here - just to let out my thoughts about those issues too. Please be aware that this is by no means the moral equivalent of a gospell or something in the kind. It is just my point of view and it is very mnuch influenced by my experiences and my emotions. So please feel free to disagree and to object to this as much as you like, provided you do this with politeness and respect.  Thanks to those who will read this-now I will try to start and keep some order in my chaotic thoughts and keep my wandering mind under some discipline...

When I consider issues such as sexism or equality between sexes (I will stay to those for now ; this will help me to avoid confusion), I usually take into consideration two aspects of those problems. One aspect is objective - you can be angry or frustrated at a general injustice, but no other personal feelings are involved. You can even express compassion toward people who have lived an experience that you have not been through. This is perfectly fine to consider a problem under this angle. It shows that you are a sensitive human being and that you care about people, you want them to be happy. Regardless if your points of view are entirely correct or not,the fact alone that you care has a grea merit. If everybodycared a little bit about other so as you do, the world would probably be a better place. Now, a few examples of what I call an “objective”consideration of a problem (I will not give an exhaustive list- just a few examples). If the access to a job is easier to men than to women just because of the predjudice that “women would not be good at it”or any other similar thought,, there is an objective injustice done to women. If a man does the same amount of work , with the same efficacity as a woman collaborator, but he gets a higher salary or he gets a promotion because he is a man, there is an injustice. If in a professional environment women are not respected, if they are harrassed or ill-treated in any way, physical or psychological, there is an objective problem. Something is VERY wrong in the place where this kind of thing happens. If in a society men have more rights and more respect than women, something is obviously wrong. I apologize if I forgot some issues- as I wrote, I merely give a few examples to explain my point of view. A more detailed discussion about one of those issues mentioned here or not could take plece another day. For now, I just remain general. OK, we come back to the objective problems: if you want to help with this kind of problem, what is the best thing to do?

First of all, when you care about an objectively unfair issue, never mind how angry or frustrated you are, try to do those two things: keep your objectivity and try to stay realistic. Don’t just get your anger out, there is no point to this. Don’t think that you will change the situation with swords and fire. Agressiveness will probably only make things worse and you will end up arguing with people you don’t know (or you simpley don’t care to argue with them. They are not worth your energy, but you just waste it with them because you are so damned angry). You need to keep a cool head , never mind how frustrated you are. Stay calm. Use arguments- not swears. Don’t just blame or criticize other people; explain what you think as clearly as you can. Avoid arguing for arguing- keep to the point. Realize that some things need TIME, so don’t raise your expectations in changing things too quickly. You will only be disappointed. Don’t expect everybody to understand you or to agree with you. If you open such subjects be ready to discuss with those who are able to discuss and just ignore or avoid those who want to take their anger and frustration out (and DO NOT be one of the latter!)  BUT, what is the best way to have an opinion about an issue that concerns you so much? How can you stay objective and keep calm ? How can you face arguments of your opponents without anger?

The answer is not so complicated: try to be as informed about the issue that interests you as possible. Do not just read one or two impressive articles that draw your attention. Read as much as possible about the issue. Go and do some research. Cross- examine the information you have to see if all you know about the issue is true; if there is not intox or biaised info in what you know. Try to find testimony by people who have been victims of the unfair treatment; if possible get some testimony by “real”people too. This is the only way to have an objective point of view of the problem that will give you the possibility to better help with your acts or your opinion. But then also and above all....

...alway- ALWAYS keep your mind open. Consider the “other point of view”. Do not only take the elements that prove yours; take some time to read arguments opposite to yours. However you support the victims, keep your mind open to the point of view of the wrong-doer too. NOT to say that he is right. To make your arguments stronger and more clever. To better help the ones treated unfairly. To better support your cause. I give you a concrete example of what precedes.

There is much talk about sexism in comics. If you are interested in the subject, you will find articles about this; you will find stories and testimony. That there is sexism in an artistic field is outrageous. Thet this particular field is one of the most open-mided and free fields (comics) is almost mad. And if you are a woman creating comics (artist, writer or whatever else), this is enraging and you feel personally concerned and twice more angry as you are involved in the field. The things you can hear or find quite easily: In the famous festival of Angoulêmme (France), no awards were given to women comic creators. There have been testimonies of various ladies in the comic field being considered with less respect than their male colleagues. In a few cases, harrassment was reported. All those things are negative- about this, ther is no discussion. BUT are those elements enough to conclude once and for all that “Comics are a Sexist Field”, take a katana and go and attack the managers of big comic companies (or even lesser ones?

First of all, and before starting to throw fireballs, take some time to THINK and get some correct info. We start by the issue of the awards at Angoulême: unfortunately this info is as true as it can be and proved by many serious articles in French and in English and by various international publications. Creative ladies are not candidates for awards in this renowned festival. OK. Can you then conclude that “comics are sexist”because of the attitude of the jury at Angoulême? Please let the sword down and listen for one m,ore minute before you start the massacre...

Last year, a great number of artists renounced to their nominations in fact of the prestige those nominations (or the awards that they would eventually receive) could bring them. French artist Riad Satouff, Italian artist Milo Manara, American artists Chris Ware, David Clowes et Charles Burns, and other French artists- Pierre Christin, Étienne Davodeau, François Bourgeon, Christophe Blain et Joann Sfar. renounced the award. Most of those names are famous in the comic field. Other important creative people in the comic field reacted by writing articles or criticizing what happened in Angoulême: Frank Miller, Bill Sinkiewitz, Alan Moore and many other important names participated in the “boycott”of the vote. Now, have you noticed? Of course women protested. BUT they were supported by their MALE colleagues of a very important renown. Which brings to the conclusion that maybe there is a lot of work to do in Angoulême as regards the equal distribution among male and female creatoirs, but in no case is this an indication that ALL the comic field is sexist. Not with so much support to the wronged women by their male colleagues...Please note that after all those rections, the attitude of the Angoulême jury is slowly changing. Now, they start including SOME women in their lists.

Harassment and a lack of respect toward women in comics has been reported. Some women were harassed at work (usually big comic companies). Others reported disrespectful behavior towards them by their male colleagues or by people working in various fields in comics that the ladies met at conventions. There is also the mentality in the comic books: they will often depict beautiful ladies with superbe athletic figures and (lightly) dressed so that their alluring figure is well visible. Of course, many will utter the conclusion with out a second thought: “But what are you expecting? Comics... are SEXIST.” Now, are they? Wait and listen before you start throwing fireballs and before you cause a powerful storm...

One cannot contest the complains of the harrassed ladies. BUT this is not a generality: in many of the greatest comic companies in the world (American DC Comics- Dark Horse Comics) the highest positions in thehierarchy are held by women. In France (and in spite of the old-fashined mentality of Angoulême) , the director of Dargaud -Lombard (Christel Hollans) and many other stuff members high in the hierarchy of companies are women. In a panel about “Women in the Comics World”, cartoonist and director of indie comics festival at Melbourne Sarah Howell said that “ in general, sexism [in comics]is not overt, but accidental.” Women are not as good as men as self promotion and don’t attend conventions as much as male comic creators do, she said. I will add my own thought- for many years, comics were almost exclusively reserved to a male audience. A majority of this audience included sensitivce and rather introvert young men, who were socially awkward with women. This can explain part of the behavior toward women: more often than not, it is awkward- not really offending or sexist. Of course exceptions exist, but to say that “comics are sexist” is rather exaggerated.  As for the ladies with alluring figures...You know, comics are a visual medium. So as in the movies, you need to show beautiful people in order to make the reader happy. If you look at the men in comics, you will find out that they are as good-looking and as the ladies. Frankly, do you know many males with a figure as perfect as Superman’s or with the superb muscles of Thor? (I know MANY ladies who are fervent fans of Thor. Not so much for his bold performances...It’s more about his looks. And I cannot say that I blame the ladies ;) ) .I happen to know some of the artists who draw the beautiful women in comics. I can assure you that they are excellent people , good companions , loving husbands and wonderful fathers (to their DAUGHTERS).

If the ladies with the alluring figures have their (well-deserved ) success and their fans, one must not forget that this kind of character is also connected to a kind of story. You will see more of those superb ladies among super-heroes. You will find some of them in comic versions of fairy tales. But fairy tales are often peopled with breathtakingly beautiful fairies and gorgeous princesses. You cannot blame comics for reproducing this model. In the recent years, other types of comic heroine has appeared, and they are extremely popular: Lady Death of the Endless in Neil Gaiman’s Sandman looks like a young girl dressed in a gothic style. She is brilliant albeit dark (what else does one expect Death to be? :) ) Her sister Delirium, with her multicolored hair and her incoherent sentences competes with Death for popularity. The female characters in Bill Willingham’s FABLES are beautiful, dynamic and not overwhelmingly sexy. Comics are an inventive medium- as their audience grows and times change, new types of female characters appear - and I am sure that we have only seen a few of them so far.

If I may add my own experience: I certainly had some issues with comics. But in the ten years that I am in the field, sexism was not one of those issues. I can attest that until now, I have been treated with more respect and consideration in the comic field than in other jobs I have done before (where I have experienced sexist behaviors...) Now, my research on the subject is not yet over, but with what I know until now, I would not accuse comics of being a “sexist”envirionment. On the contrary, hardships in comics are the same for male and female creators and if you have solid nerves, you can do it- regardless of your genre.

With this, I will ask your permission to take my leave for tonight. It is late and I really need some sleep. But I will be with you again to continue this discussion.

Next time, I will talk you about the second case: when things are NOT objective. When the issue is emotional rather than unfair. In this case, things become much more difficult as you can already imagine. But this will be for next time. For now...

I am off. Don’t forget: kep your mind open and clear and stay far from extreme reactions. And always search as much info as possible to defend the causes you stand for.

Good night and sweet dreams ;) <3

[grison-in-space]

In general, understanding radical feminism for what it is and why it appeals to many people requires an understanding that the greatest strength of radical feminism as a tool for understanding misogyny and sexism is also its greatest faultline.

See, radical feminism is a second wave position in feminist thought and development. It is a reaction to what we sometimes call first wave feminism, which was so focused on specific legal freedoms that we usually refer to the activists who focused on it as suffragists or suffragettes: that is, first wave feminists were thinking about explicit laws that said "women cannot do this thing, and if they try, the law of the state and of other powerful institutions will forcibly evict them." Women of that era were very focused on explicit and obvious barriers to full participation in public and civil life, because there were a lot of them: you could not vote, you could not access education, you could not be trained in certain crucial professions, you could not earn your own pay even if you decided you wanted to.

The second wave of feminism, then, is what happened when the daughters of this first wave--and their opponents--looked around and said to themselves: hold on, the explicit barriers are gone. The laws that treat us as a different and lesser class of people are gone. Why doesn't it feel like I have full access to freedoms that I see the men around me enjoying? What are the unspoken laws that keep us here?

And so these activists began to try to dig into the implicit beliefs and cultural structures that served to trap women asking designated paths, even if they did wish to do other things. Why is it that woman are pressured not to go into certain high prestige fields, even if in theory no one is stopping them? How do our ideas and attitudes about sex and gender create assumptions and patterns and constrictions that leave us trapped even when the explicit chains have been removed?

And so these activists focused on the implicit ideas that create behavioral outcomes. They looked inward to interrogate both their own beliefs and the beliefs of other people around them. They discovered many things that were real and illuminated barriers that people hadn't thought of, especially around sexual violence and rape and trauma and harassment. In particular, these activists became known for exercises like consciousness-raising, in which everyday people were encouraged to sit down and consider the ways in which their own unspoken, implicit beliefs contributed to general societal problems of sexism and misogyny.

Introspection can be so intoxicating, though, because it allows us to place ourselves at the center of the social problems that we see around us. We are all naturally a little self centered, after all. When your work is so directly tied to digging up implications and resonances from unspoken beliefs, you start getting really into drawing lines of connection from your own point of interest to other related marginalizations--and for this generation of thinkers, often people who only experienced one major marginalization got the center of attention. Compounding this is the reality that it is easier to see the impacts of marginalization when they apply directly to you, and things that apply to you seem more important.

So some of this generation of thinkers thought to themselves, hang on. Hang on. Misogyny has its fingers in so many pies that we don't see, and I can see misogyny echoing through so many other marginalizations too--homophobia especially but also racism and ableism and classism. These echoes must be because there is one central oppression that underlies all the others, and while theoretically you could have a society with no class distinctions and no race distinctions, just biologically you always have sex and gender distinctions, right? So: perhaps misogyny is the original sin of culture, the well from which all the rest of it springs. Perhaps there's really no differences in gender, only in sex, and perhaps we can reach equality if only we can figure out how to eradicate gender entirely. Perhaps misogyny is the root from which all other oppressions stem: and this group of feminists called themselves radical feminists, after that root, because radix is the Latin word for root.

Very few of this generation of thinkers, you may be unsurprised to note, actually lived under a second marginalization that was not directly entangled with sexism and gender; queerness was pretty common, but queerness is also so very hard to distinguish from gender politics anyway. It's perhaps not surprising that at this time several Black women who were interested in gender oppression became openly annoyed and frustrated by the notion that if only we can fix gender oppression, we can fix everything: they understood racism much more clearly, they were used to considering and interrogating racism and thinking deeply about it, and they thought that collapsing racism into just a facet of misogyny cheapened both things and failed to let you understand either very well. These thinkers said: no, actually, there isn't one original sin that corrupted us all, there are a host of sins humans are prone to, and hey, isn't the concept of original sin just a little bit Christianocentric anyway?

And from these thinkers we see intersectional feminists appearing. These are the third wave, and from this point much mainstream feminist throughout moves to asking: okay, so how do the intersections of misogyny make it appear differently in all these different marginalized contexts? What does misogyny do in response to racial oppression? What does it look like against this background, or that one?

But the radical feminists remained, because seeing your own problems and your own thought processes as the center of the entire world and the answer to the entire problem of justice is very seductive indeed. And they felt left behind and got quite angry about this, and cast about for ways to feel relevant without having to decenter themselves. And, well, trans women were right there, and they made such a convenient target...

That's what a TERF is.

Now you know.

[the-beyoutiful-people]

Feminism & Honour Killing

Hellos from us and welcome back to our weekly blog! This blog got a little postponed due to the new year’s celebration. Happy new year from us! We wish everyone a better, more enjoyable year. I hope we all ease it a bit down this year as the last one has been indeed tough for all of us.

Anyway! Let's get straight into our main topic for this week which is Women’s Rights.

You got it right. It is, in one word, feminism. To be specific, we’re explaining the reason as to why feminism is important and why do we need it, as a society, in order to have justice in this world.

To start this blog off, the meaning of feminism is the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes. It is the basic rights of women. or In other words, human rights.

A lot of people tend to mistake the meaning or the purpose of feminism due to being brainwashed by false and misleading information regarding women rights, and/or not being educated enough. There isn't really another explanation for this other than ignorance and lack of compassion.

I do understand that feminism is such a well-known movement throughout the world that perhaps I don’t need to explain much about nor get into details as everything can be found online. However, I will speak about my own experience, once again, in order for people to understand it better. Or so I hope.

As a woman myself, I’ve been discriminated against too many times to count. I’ve been looked down upon, and my freedom of doing anything simple, really, has been taken away due to my gender. Or in other words, due to sexism, lack of feminism and of course, injustice.

Yes. exactly. This is what I’m aiming at, Injustice is definitely the opposite of feminism. In order for justice to be real, to actually exist, we need feminism. And that is it.

Many women in the middle east go through hell because of sexism, arab women specifically, get tortured and killed by their own family members and, by the name of “Honour”.

Yes. There is a name of such a horrific crime. “Honour Killing” is the murderous act to arab women who chose to not follow their family’s orders as to how to live their lives, who to get married to, and whether they should get education or not. What’s worse is that in many arab countries the “Honour Killing” is legal, and no, it isn’t punished by law.

This means that it is “okay” for women and young girls to be killed by their fathers, brothers or even cousins in the name of honour.

As an arab woman, I've grown up hearing stories about tragic events that happened to women i’ve met and looked at as role models. For a very long time I thought that this might be normal. Although I never accepted it nor did I want it for my gender, race or women all around the world. I was just brainwashed to believe that this might be my fate if I dare to bring shame to the people who “care” about me.

I no longer am.

I no longer will be.

This of course is from my own point of view as I have grown up and become the woman I am today, who went through a lot of unnecessary struggles that I can never speak of, I am still willing to share what I can. To, at very least, bring awareness to this important issue.

Women all around the world are being discriminated against, that is in no way a lie, nor is it a “point of view”. It is a fact. It is our sad reality. That, we must change.

Otherwise, justice is not real. And will never be.

[buffythedragonqueen]

Why do they keep telling us we should stop dreaming of a better world? The Game of Thrones Finale

I will not lie: I am a nerd, and I had really studied before the last season started. In addition to that, for full disclosure, I had already bent the knee to Daenerys Targaryen in book 1, I stand by her, always will, and wanted Daenerys and Jon to rule together (I know, they are related, but it is the Middle Ages in Europe, it does not matter). However, the ending of Game of Thrones has been ... confusing. Confusing for me as a human really. 

I shall be forever grateful to the actors and the crew: all aspects of the show (but the writing)  were unbelievable, glorious, and should be covered, showered, with awards, but the writing ... should not.  MIND THE SPOILERS Aside from what was already said - the rushed plot that made no sense (so all the studying I did went out of the window), the trashed 10-years-long character developments, and countless wasted opportunities for potentially amazing dialogues (e.g. Daenerys and Cersei, Sansa and Cersei, etc.) - I was left bewildered and angry, with many questions about society, and the role of art in changing the world. Isn’t the role of art to remind us, and teach us, how to fight for ideas? For freedom, for equality, for justice?

I will be even more honest. I was triggered by the last 3 episodes, yet I kept watching, in the hope that the ending would have showed me what I had hoped to see. Eventually, to cope with the loss of Daenerys Targaryen (which never happened in my head, denial is always the way),

 and the disappointment, and the anger, and for the sole purpose of catharsis, I even dared to start writing what I would have wanted to see as conclusion of the show, which I linked here. And probably I will write myself a season 9 as a sequel for the show:  I am no writer, no psychologist, so this is merely my attempt to overwrite that last season in my brain, with the messages I would have wanted to see delivered by the end of the show, as opposed to what I saw.  I am mildly ashamed of what I am writing, it is maybe sentimental, possibly derivative,  maybe poorly written, but that is not the point here: I  had to express somewhere the ideas for which I wanted this show to fight, instead of perpetrating restraining and negative cliches. Watching the finale, I was left with many questions:

Why do they keep showing us toxic masculinity, instead of nice men?

Why are sex addicts sold as “average men”? The final all- males-council discussing brothels was appalling, not funny, appalling!

Why did they have one of the most powerful glorious female character in the history of literature gaslighted and killed by her boyfriend, who until that moment was one of the best positive male character ever written in the history of literature; he was courageous and sweet, generous and just and non-ambitious, a non-macho positive nice man. Why did they turn a perfectly nice guy into a murderer? Is there no way out? Why did they need to ruin Jon Snow, and leave us with Bronn and Tyrion? Seriously, Bronn? Seriously….Bronn? Jon, previously lovely Jon, left the stage to these sex addicts, for a spiral of hopelessness: should I infer from this that men are spineless, murderers, rapist, sex addicts, gamblers, liars, otherwise women put them in the firendzone (e.g. Jorah, Daario). 

So gents, those of you who are nice, will never be loved. Ladies, pets (cats, dogs, ferrets,…) are the solution. Pets.  

Why do we keep seeing sexism, instead of feminism? Specifically:

 Why do we keep seeing double standards: if a male ruler executes traitors is acceptable, but if a female ruler does the same thing it means she is mad? Daenerys had executed a bunch of enemies, as any king would do, yet in her case these were clues of madness. Oh well, we women are too emotional, aren’t we? (sense the sarcasm there) Sit still, look pretty, ladies. And do not forget to smile.

Why do we keep seeing that men judge women for every. single. thing. even though they are not really in a position to talk? Why did we see Tyrion and Varys (two men) discussing whether Daenerys was fit to rule, after she gathered the biggest army ever seen, saved everybody from the dead, actually fought into battle (while Tyrion and Varys were hiding in the crypts)? And why did we see a male character suggesting a man is more suitable than a woman to rule? It was one of the most appalling misogynist scenes I have ever watched in my life. Until a man told a man to execute a woman, without a trial, which brings me to my next question;

Is it ok that if man kills a woman, if he thinks it is right? Why was it represented as a heroic decision? She could have died in thousands of ways, yet the manipulated boyfriend, the only person she trusted, that killed her when she was vulnerable, with no explanation at all, no discussion aside from some ambiguous questions, seemed like a good idea; why?

Why did we see Brienne of Tarth, a warrior, writing about the man who had dumped her. in her nightgown. for his sister. after a superfluous-for-the-narrative one night thing. Why didn’t she write about herself? Why was she crying? Why did Cersei Lannister die crying? And of a death by brick, of all deaths? Why were all the women - warriors, mind- crying, pouring their hearts to undeserving men?

Between us, I was already angry at the conversation Daenerys had with the King in the North Jon, when he decided to bend the knee after Daenerys flew beyond the wall to save him (7thseason, episode “Beyond the Wall”). Daenerys says “I hope I deserve it”. OK. You raised 3 dragons, endured starvation, violence, gathered armies and fleets, freed cities from slavers, and lost a dragon to save him from his idiotic decisions: You bl**dy fu***ng do deserve it! Why did we see her asking for his approval?

Why are people with mental health issues feared and abandoned, instead of helped and supported? The mad-queen-twist was justified by the writers with a “there were clues” chorus. In my opinion it was not justified at all: there were clues she had occasional, and rare, anger management issues, and, in season 8, depression and anxiety; these could be a result of her PTSD, since she was sold and raped, and starved, and had to dodge people who wanted to kill her in many occasions, and not necessarily it had to be a hereditary trait. The people around her, and also the man who was supposed to love her, instead of building a support network around her and helping her, killed her. Too often individuals with mental health issues are ostracised, and treated with contempt, rather than sustained, so to me it would have been interesting to see a resolution of her problems (assuming she had any), rather than her impending doom.

Why was rape described as an occasion to become stronger? Why are we afraid to say what rape actually does to women? To victims? Why do we need to think that women recover and become stronger? Some do not recover at all. Some kill themselves. Why are we afraid of saying it?  It is not true that all that does not kill you makes you stronger: if it does not kill you as a whole, sometimes it has killed a part of you. As for the strength, I think that pain makes you impervious. It is love that makes you stronger. 

Why do they keep showing us competition between women, instead of sisterhood? Seeing Sansa and Arya fighting Daenerys for no apparent reason, was very disappointing. Seeing Sansa plotting against Daenerys, after the growth her character had in season 7 (”I am a slow learner, but I learn.”) was really sad: I was looking forward to team Dany-Sansa-Arya-Missandei-Brienne against the world, with packs of wolves and dragons as weapons.  That did not happen. Of course.

Why did we see weird racist scenes? The only woman of colour of the show died in chains. In chains. I do not think I have to add anything. 

Humans came out destroyed in this finale, as, apparently, one cannot change, ever: one is stuck with the hand one was dealt in the beginning, no matter the experiences, the fighting, the hopes, the work one has done on oneself; if one is born a slave, will die a slave; if born with anger management issues will not stop until everybody is dead (even though one had a spoiler about it years before, at the House of the Undying); there is no way out from toxic relationships; if born alone, even if technically the king, will still die alone; love does not conquer all, if one gets manipulated  well enough; and men can judge a woman, and, even without a trial, sentence her to death.

To me, the misogyny, the emotional and physical abuse, and toxic masculinity represented in the last three episodes of the show, represent the culture we are trying to fight, not the one that I would have wanted to stream to 60000000 people, including young adults, abused women, and people that hoped to see a message of hope, giving the dark times we are living: brave, sweet, courageous, honest, generous, smart, and mighty women and men, that work together for a better world; a world where there is redemption, freedom, diversity, and where people fight for what is important. 

For some reason, at some point, happy endings have started to be considered derivative. But people need hope. Young people need to be inspired, people who suffer need role models to help them overcome their pain. “Then they should not have watched Game of Thrones.” you say? I disagree. The show left the classic dichotomy between good and evil, and had complex characters that lived in the spectrum in between. The characters had the complexity of life into them.  

The greatness of the show, to me, was that most characters had overturned their destiny. If the final season had been written differently, GoT finale could have been the script for the resistance against violence, injustice, sexism, toxic relationships, defeat. It was not. 

I just want to add this: what they showed us is not true. Never stop fighting for what is important, even if it seems silly (like  getting angry for the last episode of a TV show): it does not mean one will necessarily win, it does not mean there will not be pain, but we can change this world into a better one. We can change ourselves, we can be kind to one another, we can support people who suffer, we can support  minorities. We can defeat the monsters, the ones in others, the ones in ourselves. We can break the wheel.

“Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, Or what's a heaven for?”  Robert Browning

“Our fathers were evil men. All of us here. They left the world worse than they found it. We’re not going to do that. We’re going to leave the world better than we found it” – Daenerys Targaryen

[loudlytransparenttrash]

“Equal Pay Day” is today, the special holiday event where feminists, their creepy male allies and anyone in need of social brownie points will peddle the bogus apples-to-oranges comparison in incomes by sex to claim that women are paid substantially less than men for the same work, ultimately painting all women as victimized, oppressed damsels and men as privileged, sexist assholes.

This date has been dubbed Equal Pay Day by feminist organizations because it supposedly represents how far into the year women have to work to make as much as their male counterparts did in the previous year. A Tuesday is also always selected for the event because that day represents how far into each work week women have to work to earn what their male co-workers earned during the previous week. They’ve put a lot of thought into this.

The reason the wage gap hysteria survives endless debunkings is because its extremely profitable, the biggest promoters of it are its greatest beneficiaries. Feminist groups recite it as their funding and charity depend on it being true. Universities recite it because their ever expanding and expensive gender classes depend on attracting woke teenagers ready to blow daddy’s savings. Politicians recite it because their campaign depends on convincing women it’s true and then promising to save them from it.

Despite the widespread acceptance of the tale, there is not a single specific piece of evidence that proves employers are in violation of federal law by paying women 20 percent less than men for doing the same job. To believe this claim, you must believe almost every business and industry across the country are rampantly and illegally ignoring the Equal Pay Act and every anti-discrimination law and that these deliberate, flagrant and ongoing violations are somehow going undetected, or even worse, being covered up by “The Patriarchy.”

If there were such ubiquitous wage disparities in violation of federal law, why are there not extensive investigations by the Department of Justice, the Office of Civil Rights or the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission? Why are there hundreds of law firms representing victims who were exposed to asbestos from decades ago but none dedicated to the millions of women who are victims of such clear and rampant discrimination today? Is it all one giant, scheming cover-up to oppress women or could it be we are faced with the dilemma of being unable to solve a problem which does not exist in the first place?

There are more than 9 million women-owned businesses in the United States, employing nearly 8 million workers. Are these women underpaying their female staff too, or is this accusation just made against male employers? What about the half a million female CEO’s in the country, surely they would do something to end this travesty against women? Surely we’d hear from them about this problem? Or maybe they know better than those whose full-time job is being an outraged gender activist. The fact that the myth is clearly unsupported by any actual evidence and every year economist after economist explains how the gap has nothing to do with sexism or discrimination doesn’t seem to matter to them.  

If there are actually employers who are illegally paying women less than men for doing the same job, those companies will be exposed, publicized and prosecuted. But just like the elusiveness of actual evidence for aliens, we can’t change those hellbent on believing something to be true even if it makes them crazy. The problem is not so much the lie itself but the political reaction. We have accepted it as the truth, mostly out of fear of being accused of sexism, and as a result it’s now considered equality and justice when actual discriminating laws, quotas and policies are enforced against our supposed perpetrators.

Equal Pay Day should be less about driving fear, victimization and resentment into young women and more about reminding them that they are equal, they’re the most safe, protected and liberated people on the planet, they’re capable of anything they want and it’s this absolute freedom which will ultimately decide how much money they earn, what career they will have and what path they will decide to take. The sooner we can acknowledge the wedge of mistrust and animosity feminism has driven between the sexes, the less their myths and ridiculous theories will pervert the life decisions of women and we can get back to doing what’s individually best for us.

[anniekoh]

black feminist futures reading list

[Photo of a conference attendee and child from the Black Feminist Futures Symposium 2016]

Via Black Perspectives - African American Intellectual History Society (AAIHS) Blog - the Black Feminist Futures Reading List of books published in 2016 that were compiled for the Black Feminist Futures Symposium at Northwestern University.

I’m listing the ten books that caught my eye in particular but check out the whole list, which originally appeared in BCALA Newsletter (Spring 2017). The book titles link to their WorldCat entry, per the original list, but I added the book descriptions and those link to the publisher’s page.

Adams, Betty L. Black Women’s Christian Activism: Seeking Social Justice in a Northern Suburb. NY: New York University Press, 2016.

Book description: When a domestic servant named Violet Johnson moved to the affluent white suburb of Summit, New Jersey in 1897, she became one of just barely a hundred black residents in the town of six thousand. In this avowedly liberal Protestant community, the very definition of “the suburbs” depended on observance of unmarked and fluctuating race and class barriers. But Johnson did not intend to accept the status quo. Establishing a Baptist church a year later, a seemingly moderate act that would have implications far beyond weekly worship, Johnson challenged assumptions of gender and race, advocating for a politics of civic righteousness that would grant African Americans an equal place in a Christian nation. Johnson’s story is powerful, but she was just one among the many working-class activists integral to the budding days of the civil rights movement. 

... Adams examines the oft overlooked role of non-elite black women in the growth of northern suburbs and American Protestantism in the first half of the twentieth century. Focusing on the strategies and organizational models church women employed in the fight for social justice, Adams tracks the intersections of politics and religion, race and gender, and place and space in a New York City suburb, a local example that offers new insights on northern racial oppression and civil rights protest. 

Carastathis, Anna. Intersectionality: Origins, Contestations, Horizons. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2016.

Book description: Through a close reading of critical race theorist Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw’s germinal texts, published more than twenty-five years ago, Carastathis urges analytic clarity, contextual rigor, and a politicized, historicized understanding of this widely traveling concept. Intersectionality’s roots in social justice movements and critical intellectual projects—specifically Black feminism—must be retraced and synthesized with a decolonial analysis so its radical potential to actualize coalitions can be enacted.

Cooper, Brittney, Morris, Susana M., and Boylorn, Robin M. The Crunk Feminist Collection. NY: Feminist Press at the City University of New York, 2017. 

Book description: For the Crunk Feminist Collective, their academic day jobs were lacking in conversations they actually wanted to have—relevant, real conversations about how race and gender politics intersect with pop culture and current events. To address this void, they started a blog. Now with an annual readership of nearly one million, their posts foster dialogue about activist methods, intersectionality, and sisterhood. And the writers' personal identities—as black women; as sisters, daughters, and lovers; and as television watchers, sports fans, and music lovers—are never far from the discussion at hand.

These essays explore "Sex and Power in the Black Church," discuss how "Clair Huxtable Is Dead," list "Five Ways Talib Kweli Can Become a Better Ally to Women in Hip Hop," and dwell on "Dating with a Doctorate (She Got a Big Ego?)." Self-described as "critical homegirls," the authors tackle life stuck between loving hip hop and ratchet culture while hating patriarchy, misogyny, and sexism.

Haley, Sarah. No Mercy Here: Gender, Punishment, and the Making of Jim Crow Modernity. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2016.

Book description: In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries imprisoned black women faced wrenching forms of gendered racial terror and heinous structures of economic exploitation. Subjugated as convict laborers and forced to serve additional time as domestic workers before they were allowed their freedom, black women faced a pitiless system of violence, terror, and debasement. Drawing upon black feminist criticism and a diverse array of archival materials, Sarah Haley uncovers imprisoned women’s brutalization in local, county, and state convict labor systems, while also illuminating the prisoners’ acts of resistance and sabotage, challenging ideologies of racial capitalism and patriarchy and offering alternative conceptions of social and political life.

A landmark history of black women’s imprisonment in the South, this book recovers stories of the captivity and punishment of black women to demonstrate how the system of incarceration was crucial to organizing the logics of gender and race, and constructing Jim Crow modernity.

Harris, LaShawn. Sex Workers, Psychics, and Numbers Runners: Black Women in New York City’s Underground Economy. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 2016.

Book description: During the early twentieth century, a diverse group of African American women carved out unique niches for themselves within New York City's expansive informal economy. LaShawn Harris illuminates the labor patterns and economic activity of three perennials within this kaleidoscope of underground industry: sex work, numbers running for gambling enterprises, and the supernatural consulting business.Mining police and prison records, newspaper accounts, and period literature, Harris teases out answers to essential questions about these women and their working lives. She also offers a surprising revelation. Harris argues that the underground economy catalyzed working-class black women's creation of the employment opportunities, occupational identities, and survival strategies that provided them with financial stability and a sense of labor autonomy and mobility. At the same time, Harris shows, urban black women strove for economic and social prospects and pleasures, and in the process experienced the conspicuous and hidden dangers associated with newfound labor opportunities.

Hogan, Kristen. The Feminist Bookstore Movement: Lesbian Antiracism and Feminist Accountability. Durham: Duke University Press, 2016.

Book description: From the 1970s through the 1990s more than one hundred feminist bookstores built a transnational network that helped shape some of feminism's most complex conversations. Kristen Hogan traces the feminist bookstore movement's rise and eventual fall, restoring its radical work to public feminist memory. The bookwomen at the heart of this story—mostly lesbians and including women of color—measured their success not by profit, but by developing theories and practices of lesbian antiracism and feminist accountability. At bookstores like BookWoman in Austin, the Toronto Women’s Bookstore, and Old Wives’ Tales in San Francisco, and in the essential Feminist Bookstore News, bookwomen changed people’s lives and the world. In retelling their stories, Hogan not only shares the movement's tools with contemporary queer antiracist feminist activists and theorists, she gives us a vocabulary, strategy, and legacy for thinking through today's feminisms.

Morris, Monique W. Pushout: The Criminalization of Black Girls in Schools. NY: The New Press, 2016.

Book description: In a work that Lisa Delpit calls “imperative reading,” Monique W. Morris (Black Stats, Too Beautiful for Words) chronicles the experiences of Black girls across the country whose intricate lives are misunderstood, highly judged—by teachers, administrators, and the justice system—and degraded by the very institutions charged with helping them flourish. Called “compelling” and “thought-provoking” by Kirkus Reviews, Pushout exposes a world of confined potential and supports the rising movement to challenge the policies, practices, and cultural illiteracy that push countless students out of school and into unhealthy, unstable, and often unsafe futures.Called a book “for everyone who cares about children” by the Washington Post, Morris’s illumination of these critical issues is “timely and important” (Booklist) at a moment when Black girls are the fastest growing population in the juvenile justice system.  

Romeo, Sharon. Gender and the Jubilee: Black Freedom and the Reconstruction of Citizenship in Civil War Missouri. Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 2016.

Book description: Gender and the Jubilee is a bold reconceptualization of black freedom during the Civil War that uncovers the political and constitutional claims made by African American women. By analyzing the actions of women in the urban environment of St. Louis and the surrounding areas of rural Missouri, Romeo uncovers the confluence of military events, policy changes, and black agency that shaped the gendered paths to freedom and citizenship.During the turbulent years of the Civil War crisis, African American women asserted their vision of freedom through a multitude of strategies. They took concerns ordinarily under the jurisdiction of civil courts, such as assault and child custody, and transformed them into military matters. African American women petitioned military police for “free papers”; testified against former owners; fled to contraband camps; and “joined the army” with their male relatives, serving as cooks, laundresses, and nurses.Freedwomen, and even enslaved women, used military courts to lodge complaints against employers and former masters, sought legal recognition of their marriages, and claimed pensions as the widows of war veterans. Through military venues, African American women in a state where the institution of slavery remained unmolested by the Emancipation Proclamation, demonstrated a claim on citizenship rights well before they would be guaranteed through the establishment of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Sanders, Crystal. A Chance for Change: Head Start and Mississippi’s Black Freedom Struggle. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2016.

Book description: In this innovative study, Crystal Sanders explores how working-class black women, in collaboration with the federal government, created the Child Development Group of Mississippi (CDGM) in 1965, a Head Start program that not only gave poor black children access to early childhood education but also provided black women with greater opportunities for political activism during a crucial time in the unfolding of the civil rights movement. Women who had previously worked as domestics and sharecroppers secured jobs through CDGM as teachers and support staff and earned higher wages. The availability of jobs independent of the local white power structure afforded these women the freedom to vote in elections and petition officials without fear of reprisal. But CDGM’s success antagonized segregationists at both the local and state levels who eventually defunded it.Tracing the stories of the more than 2,500 women who staffed Mississippi's CDGM preschool centers, Sanders’s book remembers women who went beyond teaching children their shapes and colors to challenge the state’s closed political system and white supremacist ideology and offers a profound example for future community organizing in the South.

Threadcraft, Shatema. Intimate Justice: The Black Female Body and the Body Politic. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016.

Book description: In 1973, the year the women's movement won an important symbolic victory with Roe v. Wade, reports surfaced that twelve-year-old Minnie Lee Relf and her fourteen-year-old sister Mary Alice, the daughters of black Alabama farm hands, had been sterilized without their or their parents' knowledge or consent. Just as women's ability to control reproduction moved to the forefront of the feminist movement, the Relf sisters' plight stood as a reminder of the ways in which the movement's accomplishments had diverged sharply along racial lines. Thousands of forced sterilizations were performed on black women during this period, convincing activists in the Black Power, civil rights and women's movements that they needed to address, pointedly, the racial injustices surrounding equal access to reproductive labor and intimate life in America. As horrific as the Relf tragedy was, it fit easily within a set of critical events within black women's sexual and reproductive history in America, which black feminists argue began with coerced reproduction and enforced child neglect in the period of enslavement. Intimate Justice charts the long and still incomplete path to black female intimate freedom and equality--a path marked by infanticides, sexual terrorism, race riots, coerced sterilizations and racially biased child removal policies. In order to challenge prevailing understandings of freedom and equality, Shatema Threadcraft considers the troubled status of black female intimate life during four moments: antebellum slavery, Reconstruction, the nadir, and the civil rights and women's movement eras.

[makaylajustine]

Let’s Talk About Human Rights

In today’s society, so many people are becoming progressive and having more of an open mind when it comes to other people’s lives. However, this can be difficult when there are people who refuse to be open minded or whose minds simply can’t wrap their minds around the idea of someone being gay. This makes life hard for those who are being nothing but their authentic selves. But Bell Hooks essay, “Call And Response-Taking A Stand”, allowed me to see what the real change needs to be in our society; the change isn’t separating yourself from those non-believers or uneducated ones, it’s about educating them on the changes that need to be made.

After conducting some research of my own, I learned a handful about bell hooks and the impact she’s made. For starters, her real name is not actually bell hooks, it is Gloria Jean Watkins. Bell hooks is just a pseudonym; “the name of her great grandmother, to honor female legacies; she preferred to spell it in all lowercase letters to focus attention on her message rather than herself” (Encyclopedia Brittanica, 1998). She also wrote a book in the early 70’s called Ain’t I a Woman: Black Women and Feminism, which I am now going to have to add to my list of books to read. Bell hooks has been writing about human rights for decades now, she certainly has seen what works and what doesn’t work when it comes to approaching such topics with people. In her essay, “Call And Response-Taking A Stand”, she said, “the only way to change from a dominator culture to a culture of fairness is to teach folks to love justice. And that teaching begins with those who are most likely to be the targets of hate-embodying principles, the revolution of values that are the heart of all true movements for social justice” (hooks, 2014, p. 123). To find out that she essentially found it easier to talk about these sort of things in a way where it is educating people was so interesting to hear.

Even though I can appreciate hooks on the idea of educating instead of debating, it does, however, get very exhausting talking to someone about basic human rights. There are people who don’t support or understand same sex marriage. There are people who don’t support or understand equal pay between gender and race. It seems as if it would get exhausting allowing yourself to not support these issues. Having to explain all the reasonings for these topics and issues as well as the LGBT+ community, black history, feminism, etc, feels as if common sense is being explained. When you’re talking to someone who is against certain issues, you’re having to repeat yourself over and over and it can make you feel like a broken record. “All too often, when freedom fighters are telling our stories again and again, speaking truth to power with no response that brings about progressive change, we grow weary. We become afraid and we long to be silent” (hooks, 2014, p. 122). Another reason why it’s so tiring to explain these issues to someone who doesn’t support or understand them is because everyone has the ability to look up information and conduct their own research. And if for some reason they still don’t understand certain topics and/or issues, they can still be accepting of them.

There are people who are accepting of these changes, and there are some people that are not as accepting of them. As time moves forward, changes are going to become second nature and it’s important to be open to the changes. Some of these changes are going to be people coming out of the closet, women standing up for themselves, black people gaining more respect as humans, immigrants coming to America, etc. But for some reason, there are people more accepting of technological advancement than they are in other humans. They’ll be all gung-ho about having a speaker in their house that listens to them (a speaker that the government has tried to get the rights to) but can’t get behind a transgendered person going to the bathroom in public; something that everyone has done anyway, whether they knew it or not. These are changes that are going to happen whether people like them or not. And the only way to move forward with society is to be accepting of these changes.

One of the biggest arguments I’ve seen about these human rights issues is people saying, “these are new problems!”, “this stuff was not happening a hundred years ago!”, “what is going wrong with society?!” My response to that is these “new problems” have been happening since the dawn of time. But because oppression was so much worse a hundred years ago, even just fifty years ago, it wasn’t as common for people to be as comfortable with themselves as they are now to say something. But now we live in a time where more people are comfortable enough to be themselves one hundred percent, which is so beautiful. “What is new is our visibility, our speaking out with change, our solidarity” (hooks, 2014, p. 122). These are not “new problems” and there isn’t anything wrong with society.

Oppression is still a problem. Racism is still a problem. Homophobia is still a problem. Sexism is still a problem. And prejudiceness is still alive in this country that claims to be united. United; that’s exactly what this country is supposed to be. We’re supposed to coexist with one another, help each other, grow with each other. We aren’t supposed to be divided or segregated. We aren’t supposed to be picking and choosing who we love and accept. Let’s do what we can do to help educate those who don’t believe or those who don’t understand. “Even though Silas powerfully calls us to act again and again-on behalf of fairness, there are not many who are answering the call” (hooks, 2014, p. 122). This line from the original essay states that yes, protests and marches do a huge deal when it comes to showing support and solidarity, but people with opposing views and beliefs may see those as a sign of being divided and that we should invest more time in helping educate people. The more we attempt to help those that are unaware to at least see the other side, there’s a higher chance of prejudiceness and oppression becoming less of a problem for the minorities in this country.

[zovekai-blog]

I’m sorry for not being an SJW (A message for some people)

So, I’m not an SJW. I don’t agree with some of their ideas and political standards and beliefs. 

 - I don’t agree with Third-Wave Feminism as a movement (However I do believe in equality among both genders, all races, all ethinicites, and all sexual orientations)  - I don’t believe that a Rape Culture exists within in the U.S. (Rape is not encouraged by the very large majority of people in the U.S.)  - I don’t believe video games are racist because they include female or male characters with unrealistic bodies (They are not setting standards and forcing you to have that body type, as it is only a detail that some people are focusing too much on and being insecure about. It’s only an individual problem, not a sexism or gendered issue)  - I don’t believe in more than genders and I think that the only variation between gender and sex are people who are Female-to-Male and Male-to-Female Transgenders  - I don’t think that otherkin identities are valid  - I don’t believe Trump would and is as bad as a president as you SJWs make it out to be  - I don’t believe that men are sexist because of trivial things (watching porn, playing “sexist” video games, and being male)  - I don’t think that white people are automatically racist just for being white  - I don’t think that any cisgendered person is transphobic because they are not trans  - I don’t think that a “patriarchal society” exists within the U.S.  - I don’t believe that the Pink Tax was ever valid and has been disproved multiple times  - I don’t believe that the wage gap exists (It is only the average earnings of ALL men and women within the U.S. It doesn’t account for job position and the people within the study DO NOT work the same job. The only reason men on average earn more money than women is because they are in higher job positions and women tend not to work in very high paying jobs)  - I don’t believe that you should silence voices or police other people’s language or opinions simply because you do not agree with them However, here are some things I DO agree with  - I do agree that all people should be treated equally regardless of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, etc.  - I do agree with both first and second wave feminism and their actions  - I do think that racism, transphobia, homophobia, etc., are problems when they occur  - I do agree that colors should not necessarily be gendered  - I do agree that gender roles do not align with all genders all the time  - I do think that Trump is not the best political campaigner (but he’s not close to comparable as Hitler or the Nazis)  - I do think that ALL opinions should be voiced (I am advocating for Freedom of Speech) So, I may not be an SJW, but that doesn’t make me a racist, homophobic, transphobic, MRA bigot. This actually goes for most people who are not Social Justice Warriors. So please don’t go around accusing people who don’t agree with you politically as being racist, transphobic, sexist, bigots. 

[miezys]

How do you identify yourself?

 And, what is the most important part of your identity? Is it your sex, your race or ethnicity, your sexual orientation, your class status, your nationality, your religious affiliation, your age, your political beliefs? Is there one part of your identity that stands out from the rest, or does your identity change depending on who you’re with, what you’re involved in, where you are in your life?

key concepts

Identity is a socially and historically constructed concept. We learn about our own identity and the identity of others through interactions with family, peers, organizations, institutions, media and other connections we make in our everyday life.

Key facets of identity—like gender, social class, age, sexual orientation, race and ethnicity—play significant roles in determining how we understand and experience the world, as well as shaping the types of opportunities and challenges we face.

Social and cultural identity is inextricably linked to issues of power, value systems, and ideology.

The media uses representations—images, words, and characters or personae—to convey specific ideas and values related to culture and identity in society.

social construction, ideology, and identity

The answers to these questions clearly depend on many factors. They prod us to think about our identities in singular terms (I am female), but also as multiple and intersecting parts (I am an African-American teenage girl from South Los Angeles). Most importantly, these questions lead us to consider the meaning of identity. Beyond “who am I?” these questions frame our individual identities in a broader social historical context and in relation to other groups.  Part of understanding our identity, therefore, means understanding how we fit in (or don’t) with other groups of people. It also means being aware of the fact that some groups have more social, political and economic power than others.

When we think about identity, we may focus on external markers (what we can see), on our biology or physiology, or how we were born; however, it’s also important to understand that our identities are comprised of ideas, ideologies, and ways of seeing the world around us. Our identities, therefore, are socially constructed, and the way we were born is only part of who we are.

But, where do these values or ideologies come from? Again, the answer is not clear-cut. In many cases, we’ve learned and internalized these values over the course of our lives from family, peers, role models, organizations, government, etc. The media also plays a prominent role in creating meaning, shaping our values, and defining who we are. These values are powerful because they generally come from places of power, but also because we internalize them and take them for granted, because they seem natural and the way things should be, and further because they can shape the way we see and understand the people, objects, practices, and institutions in our lives.

If our identities are socially constructed, then they are not neutral. In fact, our gender, race and ethnicity, sexual orientation and class can play a significant role in determining whether we have social, political and economic power, how we get that power, and how we use it. Our identity can fundamentally shape our life experience, how we’re treated, whom we meet and become friends with, what kind of education and jobs we get, where we live, what opportunities we’re afforded, and what kind of inequities we may face.

Given the role our identity plays in the way we experience and accrue power, it’s important to understand the potential obstacles, discrimination and oppression that some groups experience over others. For some, the experience of being a particular sex or sexual orientation, from a particular racial or ethnic group or socio-economic class, involves recurring and even systematic or institutional prejudice. This prejudice can manifest in unequal opportunities, rights, or wages, as well as being stereotyped, marginalized or persecuted.

Sexism. Racism. Heterosexism. Classism.

These terms reflect beliefs that posit the superiority of one identity over another: men over women; whites over non-whites; straight over gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender; wealthy over other classes. Historically, the terms have been used to call attention to discrimination and bias. They further challenge ideologies that perpetuate hierarchical structures and limit a subordinate group’s opportunities and freedoms.

Feminism. Civil Rights. Gay Liberation. Occupy Wall Street.

These social movements have called out sexist, racist, heterosexist and classist ideologies and clamored for social justice and change. Some of the calls for change have been significant. We can point to major changes in law and policy (Title VII also known as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Pay Act of 1963, Title IX, etc.). However, it’s also important to point out that these legal changes do not necessarily eradicate the underlying problems tied to endemic sexism, racism, heterosexism and classism. That is because the bias and prejudice at the root of sexism, racism, heterosexism and classism run deep, and are not easily fixed. They are part and parcel of our culture and our ideologies.

So, where and how does change happen, and what does it look like?

In addition to the legal and policy avenues that address sexism, racism, heterosexism and classism, grassroots movements have tackled these problems. A grassroots or bottom up approach to change can come in many forms, including parades and marches, boycotts and sit-ins, public service announcements, watch dog groups that monitor institutions (from the government to media industries), and increasingly, citizen journalism and social media.

identity and the media

The media can be both a site of change, but also fundamentally a site that perpetuates ideologies and norms. The media uses representations—images, words, and characters or personae—to convey ideas and values. Media representations, therefore, are not neutral or objective. They are constructed and play an important role in imparting ideology.

One question we might ask, then, is whether media produce ideologies or simply reflect them, mirroring what’s already happening in society. This is another difficult question to answer. The line between mirroring reality and producing reality is difficult to discern.

Regardless of where ideologies originate, the media plays a key role in conveying ideas and giving them weight. With the media, we tend to see the same images and representations over and over again. Media rely heavily on genres, conventions and stereotypes. As certain images and representations are repeated, they become familiar and natural. But are these representations really “natural”?

Think about what goes on behind the scenes. Screenwriters, directors, casting agents, set and costume designers all make choices that help audiences understand who a character is and what they care about. These behind-the-scenes players use clothing, hair and makeup, the way characters speak, and how they move as shorthand in their storytelling. It’s important to look at these elements of the story, rather than take them for granted. Think about the choices made in creating characters and telling stories (even in non-fiction news, documentary, and advertising). It’s also important to consider whether or not a character is round and whole or more of a caricature and stereotype.

Understanding and critically examining what goes on behind the scenes can help us see that media representations are constructed and not natural. If identities in the media are constructed, should we accept them at face value? Or can we question them? And, even change them?

Read the overviews on gender, race and ethnicity, class, and sexuality to get a better idea of the way values and meanings are specifically tied to each of these individual facets of our identities. The overviews serve as building blocks to frame the media examples on this website. Each media example and the accompanying questions, in turn, prompt you to dig deep and critically think about the way media creates meanings, values, and expectations tied to our identities. Note that most of the media examples and the overviews are written from an American perspective or vision of the world. Once you familiarize yourself with the critical tools to analyze identity in the media, you can apply your knowledge and approach to any number of examples, including media from across the globe.

RELIGION

Religion can tie a group of people together and identify them to be of a religious group whom follow the same beliefs and teachings.

ETHNIC BACKGROUND or CULTURAL BELIEF

Any particular ethnic group will identify themselves to be an ethnic community who follow the same cultural belief or spoken language. Simply because they have that commonality of values and belief system inherited by their culture that bonds them together to be a part of the community.

VALUES AND BELIEFS

Values and beliefs despite what background or culture you come from can strike a common ground with people and give themselves an identity. For example, if you live your life and have built beliefs and values upon what a warrior would do. Then you may have an identity of a warrior attitude.

OCCUPATION AND HOBBIES

Occupation and hobbies can also define your identity because occupation and hobbies itself is a title of the type of work that you do or a hobby that you enjoy. For example, if you work as a builder as a brick layer then you are identified by your work as a brick layer, if you are a cleaner and do end of work cleaning then in the working environment people identify this particular group as end of lease cleaners. The same goes for hobbies, whether you enjoy surfing or act as a magician, actor, gymnast all these hobbies associate you with an identity that others will perceive.

PHYSICAL ATTRIBUTES

Your physical attributes also play a big part of your identity. Many people have spitting image in their mind of how such a person with a particular identity would look like. That’s how we stereotype. Fitness fanatics are stereotyped to be muscular, thin, toned and always wearing sport clothes. Whereas, basketballers are stereotyped to be tall and lean people and celebrities are given the stereotype of uniqueness, fashionistas and even glamourous with the style of clothes they choose to wear.

[toriend]

Feminist Masculinity

As mentioned before, feminism is not targeted towards men, but sexism altogether. Bell Hooks mentions in Chapter 12 of her book, Feminism is for Everybody, “as the movement progressed, as feminist thinking advanced, enlightened feminist activities saw that men were not the problem, that the problem was patriarchy sexism, and male domination” (Hooks, 2000, pg. 67). In other words, inviting men and boys into the movement makes increased numbers in empowering women. The goal is, and has been, to try and rid or minimize of patriarchy so that women will no longer be exploited and oppressed. She concludes the chapter by stating, “a feminist vision which embrace feminist masculinity, which loves boys and men and demands on their behalf every right that we desire for girls and women, can renew the American male. Feminist thinking teaches us all, especially how to love justice and freedom in ways that foster and affirm life” (Hooks, 2000, pg. 71). Feminism is not just for women, it is for all genders and whoever believes in the movement and wishes to make progress within it. These voices deserved to be heard, and the more voices there are, the louder the message.

A great example of such a movement is the HeForShe campaign introduced by well-known actress Emma Watson. She stated in her speech back in 2014 that her purpose is to “’try and galvanize as many men and boys as possible to be advocates for gender equality. And we don’t just want to talk about it, but make sure it is tangible.’” This campaign has been going on for two years and now has 1,302,957,799 gender equality actions and counting according to their website. You too can be a part of the movement and join at heforshe.org. As mentioned by Ms. Watson, “feminism by definition is ‘the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities. It is the theory of the political, economic and social equality of the sexes.” No matter your gender, join the movement and be a part of history.

Link to Join the HeForShe movement: 

http://www.heforshe.org/en

Reference

Hooks, Bell. (2000). Feminism Is For Everybody Passionate Politics. South End Press: Cambridge, MA.

[linksfilter]

Among the stalwarts of the far right, the contemporary threats presented by climate change, Iran, and even global Islam all pale in comparison to “gender ideology”. Earlier this month, Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro called for a bill to ban “gender ideology” in the country’s elementary schools. In Poland, the far-right Law and Justice (PiS) government has prohibited gender (and gay and lesbian studies) from schools so that children will once again “study normal, classic subjects”. In Hungary, students beginning university this year will no longer be able to take courses in gender studies, after the Prime Minister Viktor Orban issued a decree revoking funding for gender studies programmes in October 2018. “The government’s standpoint is that people are either born male or female,” said a spokesperson. For these politicians and others like them, gender ideology is an attack on the traditional family – and an existential threat to the nation. What is “gender ideology”, though? Where sex is a biological category, gender is a social construct. It's about how society perceives gender roles and what their alleged characteristics are. For the far right, gender is a left-wing conspiracy theory, designed to weaken the traditional nuclear family structure and even the nation state – which is based on the role of women as literal mothers of the nuclear family, and figurative mothers of the broader nation. Still, far-right politicians and activists have distinct ideas about gender roles, which in part reflect the views of their respective societies. These differences can be grouped together as traditional, modern-traditional and reactionary. Traditional views of gender are more evident in machismo and conservative cultures. Paradoxically, reactionary perceptions are increasingly popular among younger and more highly educated men in northern Europe and North America. At second glance, this makes sense; their generation is the first to be an increasingly marginalised minority in college – inferior in numbers, grades, and job prospects. Most far-right politicians take a traditional view of gender that sees women first and foremost as mothers, discouraging them from working outside of the household. The idea that women are “virgin-mothers” points to a kind of benevolent sexism where women are vulnerable and dependent upon (and deserving of) protection from strong men. Such politicians view gender ideology as a threat to the fundamentally different and “natural” roles that men and women play in society. Where the European Union has embraced a strategy of gender mainstreaming that strives for gender equality, Hungary and Poland have introduced their own policies of “family mainstreaming” as a way to promote the traditional family structure. As the Hungarian Minister of Human Capacities recently stated, “women will give birth if raised to do so.” But other politicians take a different view. For the Dutch Party for Freedom (PVV) or the Sweden Democrats (SD), women are more than just future mothers. This approach falls into the “modern-traditional” view of gender, where women’s important and unique social role as mothers doesn’t negate their equality in society and the workplace. Marine Le Pen, the leader of the French National Rally (RN, previously known as the National Front) embodies this modern-traditional view; the twice-divorced mother of three presented herself as a woman, a mother, and a lawyer (in that order) in her campaign video for the 2017 presidential elections. Politicians like Le Pen believe feminism was initially well intentioned but has since gone too far. Her mentality is one of raising the drawbridge, in the belief that gender equality has been achieved for “real” women – who no longer need quotas or special protection. As Barbara Pas, leader of the Flemish Interest (VB) faction in the Belgian parliament, declared: “You know what I find denigrating for women? Quota[s]!” In the view of Pas and others, left-wing feminists ignore the real threat to gender equality: Islam. Francisco Serrano, a candidate for the Spanish far right party Vox and a family court judge, captured this in a recent tweet: “I wonder: why won’t these opportunistic, transgenic radical feminists go to Muslim countries to defend the rights of women there?” The British sociologist Sara Farris has called this “femonationalism”. The modern-traditionalist far right presents itself as the real defenders of women and womens' rights, against an alleged “Islamisation” of Europe. Its exponents spout an eclectic mix of traditional racist tropes – innocent white women brutalised by animalistic non-white men – with pseudo-liberal defenses of gender equality and womens’ rights. This leads to unexpected outcomes, as when Marine Le Pen approvingly quoted feminist icon Simone de Beauvoir in an op-ed warning that mass immigration would endanger “the precious freedoms hard won by our mothers and grandmothers.” The internet has become a fertile petri-dish for another iteration of far-right beliefs about gender. Across online communities – from popular message boards like 4chan and 8chan, to a flowering movement of “incels”, a portmanteau describing the misogynistic men who define themselves as involuntary celibates because they can’t find a sexual partner – far-right followers are espousing reactionary and hateful views about women. Common to these online communities is a view of women as morally deviant and psychically weak, but as politically and socially strong. Men are allegedly oppressed, while “Femi-Nazis” (feminists) supposedly control society through “political correctness”, and women control men through their use (or refusal) of sex. As the US “men’s rights activist” and “alt-lite” social media personality Mike Cernovich put it: “Women love aggressive men, but only if they are alpha males.” But this reactionary view is no longer limited to online grifters like Cernovich. Thierry Baudet, leader of the Dutch Forum for Democracy (FvD), the fourth-biggest Dutch party in the European elections, once said: “The reality is that women don’t just wanted to be treated ‘respectfully’ by their sex partner; they don’t want you to respect their ‘no’, their resistance. The reality is that women want to be overruled, dominated, yes, overpowered.” To be clear, toxic masculinity and misogyny are not absent from the more traditional far right. Think of US President Donald Trump bragging about “grab[bing] ‘em by the pussy”, or Jair Bolsonaro saying a female opposition politician was too ugly for him to rape. These cases break with the officially propagated line of benevolent sexism. This is why benevolent sexism is almost always ambivalent – combining supposed concern for women with underlying hostility. Among gender reactionaries, hostile sexism is the norm; women must be dominated, not protected, by alpha males like themselves. Recalling Sigmund Freud’s “Madonna-whore complex”, where men either see women as saintly Madonnas or debased prostitutes, for those like Thierry Baudet and Mike Cernovich, women are always the latter. Despite the growing diversity in gender views, though, the global far right converges on one thing: they all denounce contemporary feminism and “gender ideology”, and see women, first and foremost, as the “womb of the nation”. Consequently, far-right men believe it is their right (and even duty) to control and police their women. After all, as the Hungarian Speaker of Parliament recently said, “individuals’ decisions on having children are public matters.” To be clear, the far right is not the only political movement to reject “gender equality” and advance various forms of sexism. Many religious and secular conservative movements do the same, and have been doing so for centuries. What makes the far right particularly important is that it has been much better at adapting its sexist views to changing gender relations in society – where several distinct cultural changes have created a situation in which men no longer have the access to, or power over, women’s bodies that they might once have had in a previous era. This adaptability is one of the key reasons for the far right’s growing success across the globe. Cas Mudde is a Dutch political scientist and the author of The Far Right Today (Polity, 2019). He tweets @CasMudde

[toneyrusso5122-blog]

Sociology

Marital relationship and also family life are the largest developments by humankind, for its social life; which put mankind at a higher pedestal, compared to other varieties. These insurance claims run the range of stereotyping, from insurance claims that women are weak, much less intelligent, and occasionally this negativeness will certainly materialize itself in extreme opposites, that a female is either a promiscuous slut or a pristine as well as pure virgin, that they either hate sex as well as reject it or that they love sex more than other task and also spend all their time procuring it. Superstitious notion in the minds of men also terrified to ask, much more worried to find, culminates, producing a system of dishonesty and fascism. The 1949 writing "The Second Sex" by the French writer and thinker Simone de Beauvoir (1908 - 1986) is a fundamental system of modern Feminism, where she sets out a feminist Existentialism which focuses and also recommends an ethical change on the concept of Woman as the quintessential Other, which de Beauvoir recognizes as essential to ladies's fascism. Clearly "women" aren't a pillar, as well as neither are the issues that they care about or believe in. Yet anti-feminist organizing is based on a deep hypocrisy and narcissism - an ideology built to assure conservative females that as long as they are doing simply great, various other women will improvise. As well as they're installing obstacles to progress right in the center of a renewed feminist awakening, with backward sexism that's ultimately not too various compared to that of their male counterparts. They claim to be the voice of feminism - without a doubt they assert to be the voice of women; so exactly what would be more likely for any type of number of individuals to conclude compared to that they remain in truth the voice of women, and that all females will conduct themselves like the toxic feminists if they are enabled freedom over their lives. The important point 'intersectionality' is attempting to do, I would certainly state, is to mention that feminism which is overly white, center class, cis-gendered and also able-bodied stands for simply one type of sight - and also doesn't review the experiences of all the multi-layered elements in life that ladies of all backgrounds face. Or when they stop demonising minorities when we attempt to organise ourselves or have empowering online discussions that celebrate blackness however are then interrupted by white people feeling entitled to earn such discussions everything about them Blanchard's essay is a wonderful entry factor about the sad demand for black feminism and also it's never undesirable for celeb characters to stick their hand for intersectionality. She could never have actually stood up as well as yelled concerning females's civil liberties, but the extremely reality that she took care of to end up being Head of state and also is today being remembered as the impressive peacetime leader of the 20th century" (not the exceptional women peacetime leader of the 20th century) suggested a shift in way of thinking for both men and women that no amount of feminist rhetoric has ever attained because in Britain. Because that time, ladies in previous European nests and also the Third Globe have actually recommended "Post-colonial" as well as "Third World" feminisms. The very reality there hasn't already been another women PM or perhaps a lady leader of a significant political celebration considering that, is telling and unbelievably disappointing. They believe that the women gender duty was built as an other to a suitable male role, and also helps to perpetuate patriarchy. Given that 1970s, the emphasis of the feminist concept by the liberal feminists has actually been changed from gender equal rights as well as sex nonpartisanship to gender difference and the women uniqueness. " Twitter doesn't offer itself to recognizing every one of the context and the state of mind I remained in when I was discussing those points. If you treasured this article so you would like to receive more info concerning http://bahutsukrija.info/varysan-%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A5-%E0%A4%A8%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%8B%E0%A4%82-%E0%A4%95%E0%A5%87-%E0%A4%B2%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%8F-%E0%A4%AA%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%87 generously visit the web site. " Soret confesses the reaction throughout E3 was rough, however he says that he's for equal rights which The Last Night has nothing to do with the adverse side of the concerns he talked about in a social-media setup. Alongside as well as often overlapping with older-identified differences between liberal, socialist, extreme and social feminisms, as an example (crucial as they remain in their various accounts of sex-related difference and also sex power), are otherwise named black, third-world ethnic-minority feminisms, themselves much from identical. The current management has said it prepares to extend the statute to limitations of power-based sexual abuse situations, and it has promised to establish a procedure for targets to report sexual abuse anonymously. After ladies acquired suffrage in Soviet Russia in 1917, the day was as well as became a national vacation commemorated each year by socialist and communist countries prior to it was adopted by the United Nations in 1975. The firm is concerned with feminism, concentrating on publications featuring solid female characters as well as discovering styles of social justice, civils rights, and ability problems. While some feminists denigrate and disrespect "stay-at-home mommies", at times coming as far as calling them servants of the patriarchy, others say that feminism respects all choices individuals make. It is an individualistic type of feminism, which focuses on women's ability to reveal and also keep their equality via their own actions as well as options. This is the sort of link that individuals need to make if they are in a thrill, as well as essentially do not have time to earn a further connection with the woman, (i.e. day video game when she is rushing a long an active street) this is generally fairly easy to do.

[tanjazavala7-blog]

Feminism Needs To Be Reclaimed By Today's Teens They're Our Future.

Sex-positive feminism is likewise called pro-sex feminism, sex-radical feminism or sexually liberal feminism. #GamerGate fans additionally attacked feminist doubter Anita Sarkeesian, whose Tropes vs. Ladies in Video clip Games collection attempts to call out and inquiry sexist stereotypes in video games. The feminist movement is in area to supply level playing fields for people. Should you cherished this short article along with you would want to get more information about http://cuvegliofilmfestival.it/liftoskin-pelle-liscia-truffa-bel-viso-sito-ufficiale generously pay a visit to the webpage. We're a diverse collective (sexuality, racial, financial, job, geographical, and so on) of doers that have made it our mission to transform the discussion of exactly what it's like to be a lady-- as well as in doing so, make our world a far better area. The campaign to nix words bossy" as a putdown of assertive girls was criticized and also buffooned not just by conservatives yet by left-wing and also liberal feminists The #YesAllWomen Twitter hashtag created in response to Elliot Rodger's shooting spree as well as his YouTube tirades about women being rejected generated a groundswell of compassion for females's stories of violence and sexism-- however likewise unease from pro-feminist men and women who felt all men were being unjustly reproached. When males are against feminism, it's frustrating, if inevitably predictable - groups with power have actually always been loathe to give it up. However when ladies come out versus sex justice, it feels worse: no matter exactly how edge, the increase of the anti-feminist female is not simply complicated however a dishonesty. I myself have actually never ever had the ability to learn exactly what feminism is; I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I share views that differentiate me from a woman of the street or a doormat. " Exactly what is it mosting likely to resemble," states Power, "to have this generation of individuals who are completely attuned to all these terms as well as groups and analyzing all these concerns from a very young age?" Brought up to know they amount to males, fourth-wave feminists are pissed off when they're not dealt with therefore, but have ample self-confidence to yell back. By 1968, although the term Women's Freedom Front appeared in the magazine Parapets, it was beginning to describe the whole females's motion. In 2014's large comic conventions reported approximate gender parity, with the variety of female guests growing more than two times as quick as male ones. The info is just as legitimate in societies where ladies can't elect, drive, date, or have pre-marital sexual relations, as it is in the West where every one of those tasks are conveniently available to a lot of women. Simply puts, pluralists withstand the lure to grand social concept," overarching metanarratives," monocausal descriptions," to enable that the explanation of sexism in a specific historical context will depend on financial, political, lawful, and social factors that specify to that context which would certainly protect against the account from being generalised to all circumstances of sexism (Fraser and Nicholson 1990). In a write-up entitled Transfeminist Crossroads," Garriga-López tells the tale of the problems and concessions, the shared visions and also split commitments, that beset a trans feminist lobbyist group in Ecuador that attempted to obtain an expense passed allowing people to provide their sex as opposed to their birth sex on their identification documents. A local of Alabama, where her intro to social causes was with the civil rights activity, Velez arrived at Georgetown, a Jesuit university in Northwest Washington, in 1981 as a college student in the English division. With the introduction of Feminism and also gender-equality, females have actually lost their conventional role as allowable and socially-acceptable sex-related "child-substitutes" (except in Japan). This acknowledges that commitment to and also advocacy for females's legal rights has not been constrained to the Female's Liberation Movement in the West. " The idea is that males will certainly deal with women much better if we present ourselves respectfully," Schreiber informs me. Actually, much of the anti-feminist work - brand-new as well as old - has actually been based on the concept that if females typically aren't on a pedestal - sex-related and also otherwise - after that guys will certainly act out. Feminism can be studied from the viewpoints of the real activities for equality or from the writings of both individual, analyst and observer addressing the underlying issues of why ladies have actually not been and also are not considereded as equivalent. Rather than providing a consistent position of feminist transphobia, the articles remind us that transsexuality was questioned, scrutinized, talked about, and approved or rejected by various feminists at various times. Where most shows would certainly have area for 1 or 2 main female personalities, Orphan Black has lots, as well as it enables the show to represent a range of ladies. White Female, Black Women, and also Feminism in the Motion Years," Indications: Journal of Women in Society and also Society, 27( 4 ): 1-095-1133. Holding various other elements continuous, they found that in between 2004 as well as 2016, assistance for feminism-- belief in the existence of social discrimination versus ladies, and also the need for higher women political power"-- grew progressively associated with assistance for the Democratic Celebration. Third-wave feminists often concentrate on "micro-politics" as well as test the second wave's standard as to just what is, or is not, helpful for females. Some might prefer to specify feminism in regards to a normative claim alone: feminists are those that think that women are qualified to equal civil liberties, or equivalent respect, or ...( fill in the empty with one's preferred account of injustice), and also one is not required to think that women are presently being treated unjustly.

[loudlytransparenttrash]

Idk where you get the idea that feminism is anything like you say it is but... maybe you should get off tumblr? I literally don't know one single feminist like the ones you describe and I'm deep in the movement. Stop basing your opinion off parodies.

This is going to be fun. If you don’t know a single feminist like the ones I describe and interact with throughout my blog, then you either live in your bedroom, completely shut off to the world or the more logical choice and that’s you’re a complete fucking liar. Let’s have a little look into some of these feminists, that you just so happen to conveniently know nothing of their existence. 

First of all let’s look at some of the horrible shit feminists have done:

The feminist group WAR has petitioned to have the government stop prosecuting women for filing false accusations.

Feminist Mary Koss denies male rape victims.

Feminists violently protesting against Warren Farrell at U of Toronto.

17,000 feminists at protest attack and sexually molesting a group of Rosary-praying Catholic men who were peacefully protecting the cathedral.

Feminists shut down a talk about male suicide and force university to stop acknowledging International Men’s Day

Feminists shut down forum for battered husbands.

Feminists started a campaign against Father’s rights groups

Feminists fought against laws granting men anonymity until charged with the crime of rape—not convicted, just charged.

Feminists fought against a law to end to the justice system favoring women simply because they are women, and giving men harsher sentences simply because they are men.

Feminist fought against men want equal treatment when victims of domestic violence, and to not be arrested for the crime of “being male” under primary aggressor policies.

Feminists force university president to resign after he claimed that we should all be entitled to free-speech

Feminists in India and Israel fought against female rapists being arrested, charged and convicted of rape.

Feminists harass and abuse teacher because his wife said that people should be allowed to wear Halloween outfits

Feminists fought against a economic stimulus for male-dominated job such as construction, etc.

Feminist fought a law against  Paternity Fraud.

Hateful Quotes by Feminsts

Feminist Harriet Harman has publicly requested employers to hire women in preference to White men if both job candidates are equally

Equality Minister,feminist Patricia Hewitt, was found guilty of breaching the Sex Discrimination Act by “overlooking a strong male candidate for a job in favour of a weaker female applicant”.

The lesbian feminist prime minister Johanna Sigurdardottir has vowed to “end of the Age of Testosterone

Feminists want to make peeing while standing illegal

Erin Pizzey had to flee the UK because she and her family received death threats and her dog murdered all because feminists didn’t like that she discovered women were equally as violent as men.

Also Suzanne Steinmetz and her children received death threats and bomb threats she discovered that  the rate at which men were victimized by domestic violence was similar to the rate for women.

Richard Gelles and Murray Straus  have all received death threats from feminists, simply for publishing their findings (that female-to-male family violence was equal to the rate of male-to-female violence).

Feminist attacks male cartoonist and is hailed a hero of feminism.

Try to shut down female prisons.

Feminists prevent a meeting about male suicide.

Jezebel mocks men who are abused.

Create rape laws that exclude female rapists.

Make it impossible to charge women with rape.

Feminists force children to swear in propaganda videos

Feminists create propaganda videos encouraging to kill men

Feminists don’t want the gov to help unemployed men.

Feminists say men can’t talk about domestic abuse.

Feminists cover up female domestic abuse stats.

Now let’s take a look at just some of the things they have had meltdowns over: 

Domino’s pizza boxes A campaign slogan written on a Domino’s pizza box, which conveyed their refusal to adhere to requested toppings changes on their artisan pizzas as a good thing, is sexist, as it perpetuates “rape culture.”

Science The University of Wisconsin - Madison (UW) offers “a post-doctorate in ‘feminist biology’ because biological science is rife with sexism and must be changed to reflect feminist thinking.” 

Voting for Donald Trump If you voted for Trump in the primary, it was clearly a sexist reactionary vote to the tsunami of Girl Power taking over America, according to Salon. Obviously, this “logic” extends to your vote in the general.

Fireworks Sexist fireworks are nothing more than a symptom of toxic masculinity: “Isn’t it sort of messed up that we celebrate our freedom by pretending to blow things up? Like a strange, collective working out of trauma,” explains NPR reporter Sarah McCammon.

Lab Rats Barbra Streisand explains: “Gender inequality even extends to mice in the labs. They’re all male! …So even female mice are discriminated against! When I asked why, the answer I got was that female mice have hormones so they’re more complex. Well, so are women!”

Calling a “pantsuit” a “pantsuit” As the New York Post points out, feminists find the word “pantsuit” sexist: Although pantsuits and traditional men’s suits are stylistically different, it’s sexist to differentiate between them with the added word “pant.”

Bras Bras are sexist because men don’t have to wear them.

Architecture As one progressive art professor explained: “architectural design has been dominated by men in order to promote a social/political order dominated by men.”

Complimenting a woman on her cooking According to Scientific American, complimenting a woman on her cooking reinforces gender stereotypes, and is a form of “benevolent sexism.”

Air conditioning Women are cold while men bask in the sexist office air conditioning. 

The word “too” In a piece titled “The 3-Letter Word That Cuts Women Down Every Day,” Huffington Post’s Cameron Schaeffer explains that use of the adverb “too” promotes the pretense that women are never good enough; they are either “too” this or “too” that.

Tickling Posting in America’s favorite feminist site we swore was satirical, Everyday Feminism, male feminist Jamie Utt explains that his incessant playful tickling of his girlfriend is actually rooted in inherent sexism, which was fostered by the patriarchy. Essentially, Jamie tickling his girlfriend is perpetuating rape culture: “Taken to its destructive ends, this can look like a million different violations of consent,” warns Utt.

Ski slopes A published academic report in The International Review for the Sociology of Sports concluded ski slopes are sexist because they are ‘masculinized spaces,’” reports the Daily Wire’s Pardes Seleh.

The alphabet The written language established “the patriarchy” and subsequently all of the world’s sexism, claim feminists.

Disliking pumpkin-spice lattes Katherine Timpf at National Review reports: “According to a Swarthmore College student’s op-ed, the real reason that people make fun of pumpkin-spice lattes is that our society thinks everything girls like is stupid because ‘girls don’t get to have valid emotions.’”

Preferring a woman shaves her legs Everyday Feminism explains that online dating sites like OKCupid help us “weed out misogynists” by asking questions like, “Do you think women have the obligation to keep their legs shaved?” If a man answers yes, he’s a sexist.

Emojis There are no menstruation-themed emojis so… sexism.

Wearing camouflageWearing camouflage is “anti-feminist:” Camouflage is representative of “the patriarchy,” so, by wearing such symbolic clothing, you are supporting female (and other “marginalized” groups’) oppression.

The phrase “hit on” This phase is apparently literal to feminists, and thus is considered “violent” sexist language that perpetuates “rape culture.”

Saying “I love women” Bustle explains that when a man says, “I love women,” he’s actually implying that he loves women “more” than men, which “implies that [women] are different, which others them and excludes those who act more ‘like men.’”

The Declaration of Independence Feminists view the Declaration of Independence as “an historical cause of sexism, as the document refers only to ‘all men’ — not ‘men and women.’”

Calling your daughter a “princess” Fathers calling their daughter “princess,” or treating them “special” is any way, is a form of “benevolent sexism.”

Asking a woman about her tattoos A man asking a woman about her tattoos, explains Everyday Feminism, is the equivalent of turning her “body into public property.” One such question given as an example: “How much did it cost?”

“Ladies’ night” UNC seniors protest “ladies’ night” at bars because it is sexist, as the promotional stunt is “demeaning to female bargoers.”

Glaciers “Academics at the University of Oregon have determined that glaciers and the science that studies them are deeply sexist.” “Merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions,” reads the abstract of an academic paper on the matter.

Long lines outside public women’s restrooms “Long lines for women’s restrooms are the result of a history that favors men’s bodies,” proclaims Soraya Chemaly, in a TIME piece. “Women are still forced to stand in lines at malls, schools, stadiums, concerts, fair grounds, theme parks, and other crowded public spaces,” she explains. “This is frustrating, uncomfortable, and, in some circumstances, humiliating. It’s also a form of discrimination, as it disproportionately affects women.”

Men grilling food When men grill food, they are only reaffirming “gender roles.” A self-loathing male feminist at explains he has fallen into a “societal trap.”

The animated film “Minions” The animated film was full of “gags,” adhering “to only the most rigid and nauseating gender tropes,” complains a feminist blogger. Plus, minions conveniently “only ever serve men.”

String cheese According to this feminist, string cheese is sexist.

Words with “man” in them According to the Gender, Sexuality, and Women’s Studies Program website at the University of Pittsburg, words like “mankind,” “freshman” and “chairman” are sexist. “'Terms to Use to Avoid Sexist Language’ are also included in an attempt to steer students away from using words like ‘mankind,’ ‘chairman,’ and ‘freshman.’ Instead, they ought to be replaced with gender-neutral options such as ‘humankind,’ ‘chair or chairperson,’ and ‘first year student.’”

Speech improvement apps Speech improvement apps like “Ummo,” which tracks non-filler words, such as “like” and “uh,” are sexist because they are  “policing women’s language.”

Shoe compliments Shoe compliments are apparently “sexist micro-aggressions.” UNC faculty members were advised against paying a woman a shoe compliment, since this is coded language for: “I notice how you look and dress more than I value your intellectual contributions.”

The color pink Since there is an undeniable knee-jerk association of the color pink with women and femininity (which in it of itself is sexist, according to feminists), when men refrain from wearing the color, they are actually saying that it’s “shameful to be a woman.”

Hating the feminist “Ghostbusters” reboot. According to a feminist at The Atlantic, the “outcry” over how crappy the new feminist “Ghostbusters” trailer was fueled by your sexism.

Spooning Spooning is apparently so sexist that Slate felt it necessary to write an entire “manifesto” against it. According to J. Bryan Lowder, the heart of spooning reveals a sexist power struggle, and reaffirms gender stereotypes: The “big spoon” is dominant and male, whereas the “little spoon” is submissive and female.

Telling a woman, “you look tired” “Chances are if a woman has a totally bare face, she’ll be told by both male and female colleagues that she looks exhausted, hungover or ill … people are so used to seeing made-up women at work that an au naturale face seems anything but natural,” Radhika Sanghani writes in a piece oh-so-aptly titled “It’s sexist to tell a woman she ‘looks tired’ at work.”

Mine shaft According to college feminists, the “phallic” words “mine shaft” contribute to “rape culture,” reports Heat Street.

Tampons Women should be able to “free bleed” without the use of sexist tampons, which are only used by women because men “period shame” them. Feminists have even run marathons while “free bleeding” in protest of good hygiene apparently mandated by “the patriarchy.”

Asking a woman to marry you The sexist dominant/submissive power dynamic behind a man asking a woman to marry him acts to reinforce “rape culture,” feminists argue.

Harry Potter The fictional “Happy Potter” books and films are sexist, as they “perpetuate rape culture” by using magical love potions on fictional characters without “consent.”

Indiana Jones There are “copious quantities of racism and sexism” in the “Indiana Jones” films, says Salon’s Matthew Rozsa. For instance, women in the films are often depicted as “materialistic, self-absorbed and shrill.”

Calling a woman “sweetheart” Feminist actresses Lena Dunham and Emma Stone say that calling a woman “sweetheart” (also “honey,” “baby,” or “babe”) is demeaning to women, and can be “just as damaging as any other name-calling” like “bitch.”

Telling a woman, “you look tired” “Chances are if a woman has a totally bare face, she’ll be told by both male and female colleagues that she looks exhausted, hungover or ill … people are so used to seeing made-up women at work that an au naturale face seems anything but natural,” Radhika Sanghani writes in a piece oh-so-aptly titled “It’s sexist to tell a woman she ‘looks tired’ at work — and here’s why.”

Comic books and graphic novels Female characters in comic books and graphic novels are portrayed with “a blatant sexualization that artists would not dare to submit their treasured male characters to,” complains an opinion piece in The Guardian.

Putting your arm around your girlfriend When a man puts his arm around his girlfriend, he is expressing “ownership” over her, says feminist actress Helen Mirren: “It annoys me when I see men with an arm slung around their girlfriend’s shoulders,” she said. “It’s like ownership.”

The nuclear family Leftist UT Professor Dana Cloud says that sexism is perpetuated through the traditional family structure, which is itself “oppressive” to women.

Slow motion Showing women in videos in slow motion invokes misogynistic “Baywatch” imagery and acts to objectify women. This was recently categorized as sexist after feminists freaked out over a promotional soccer video which featured female fans cheering in slow motion.

Complaining about political correctness If someone complains that something is politically incorrect, they are really just a misogynist using such language as a cover to say/do sexist things, says Everyday Feminism. Also, they are likely a racist.

“Boyfriend” jeans “Boyfriend” style jeans are sexist for a whole lot of reasons, apparently. Being created to benefit the ‘male gaze’ is the main issue.

Farting “By farting louder the man is using passive aggressive violence to position himself as dominant, this intimidates the woman to subconsciously not release as much flatulence and thus the woman fearing for her safety doesn’t fart as loud as a sign of submissiveness, this in turn contributes to rape culture and women being oppressed.”

Interrupting a woman This is apparently not just rude behavior, but sexist, since it’s really a symptom of the patriarchy teaching men that women deserve to be interrupted, as they are not your equal but your inferior.

The derogatory phrase “go f*ck yourself” To feminists, “go f*ck yourself” is not just a nasty, derogatory phrase used by both sexes, it’s sexist against women because it reinforces “rape culture.”

The word “cupcake” The word “cupcake” enforces the gender stereotypes that women and girls are weak, frail and need protection. 

Witchcraft According to internet feminists, witchcraft is sexist because it’s woman-centric.

Hollywood There are far too many white men casted as leads and working behind the camera, notes Salon. “Hollywood’s diversity crisis is even worse than we thought: Straight white men still rule, on screen and off.”

The phrase “I will force myself” Apparently, saying that you will “force” yourself to do something is coded language for it’s-okay-to-rape-women. This “violent” language perpetuates “rape culture,” feminists say.

Professionalism “Professionalism” in the workplace is “oppressive” toward women, as it reinforces “social hierarchies that value white maleness above all,” feminists say.

The word “ladies” The word “ladies” reeks of “paternalistic condescension,” according to feminists

Complimenting a woman’s handwriting Apparently, telling a woman she has “nice handwriting” is sexist. The reason why it’s “sexist” is unknown, as it was fussed over by feminists in Bristol without so much as an explanation.

Men sitting with their knees apart “Manspreading” is “an assertion of male dominance,” and “every one” of the manspreaders does it because he feels like he has to “claim his territory and his manhood in this public space, even at the discomfort of all the other passengers.”

Running against Hillary Clinton A feminist reporter from the New York Times suggested that it was sexist for Bernie Sanders to run against Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Democratic primary, as it might have blocked Hillary from becoming the first female nominee of a major party.

The word “cheer” The word “cheer” was stricken from a college fight song, as the word was thought to “devalue the accomplishments of female students.”

Clapping Citing ‘triggering’ concerns, feminist convention bans clapping, replaces with ‘Jazz Hands’. ‘Clicking fingers’ is also replacing clapping at universities as it’s safer.

Having to pay for a tampon Feminists are upset that they have to pay for their own basic hygiene—which is obviously a condition of the patriarchy oppressing women who can’t escape their period due to sexist biology.

Finding purpose in motherhood Finding purpose in motherhood is a patriarchal trap, as seen when feminists lost their minds over singer Adele proclaiming such an anti-feminist sentiment.

Not supporting Hillary Clinton for president If you don’t support the candidate with a uterus, and you have a uterus, there is a special place in hell for you.

Of course, if you’re a man and don’t support Hillary, you’re obviously pro-female-oppression and can’t stomach the thought of a uterus occupying the White House.

Man caves Man caves are a “disgusting patriarchal myth” and often “exclude” women, therefore, they are sexist.

Reports that a celebrity might be pregnant “Ban the bump-watch: Beyoncé’s belly scrutiny is sexist, invasive and bad for all women,” reads a Salon headline. I mean, why does the sexist media only notice a “baby bump” with women? Sexist biology strikes again.

A Target t-shirt A t-shirt sold in Target with the word “Trophy” on it is “demeaning to women,” feminists complain.

A prom photo A prom photo caused outrage as it shows boys in “thought” and girls “smiling,” the photo perpetuates some negative, sexist stereotypes, apparently.

School dances The expectation that boys have to ask girls to the dance acts to reinforce sexist gender stereotypes. 

Telling young boys, “you need a haircut” By telling a young boy that he “needs a haircut,” you are actually telling him that he is looking “too feminine— as if looking feminine is the worst thing a boy can do,” explains a feminist at Bustle.

The word “bossy” The negative connotation of the “gendered” word “bossy” perpetuates the sexist notion that women should not “lead.”

Opening doors for women This is a form of “benevolent sexism,” according to feminists at Everyday Feminism who insist that “chivalry must die.” By opening the door for a woman, you are not being polite, you’re signaling that women are weak and men are here to protect and take care of them. Talk about a loaded gesture.

School and workplace dress codes School and workplace dress codes often conform to what’s deemed “appropriate” to the “male gaze.” 

Amazon On Amazon, you can search for “girls’ toys” and “boys’ toys,” such a distinction is sexist.

Gender-specific bathrooms The patriarchy created gender-specific bathrooms to exclude women and treat them as man’s lesser; according to feminists, women wanted in on the men’s room.

A statue “This highly lifelike sculpture has, within just a few hours of its outdoor installation, become a source of apprehension, fear, and triggering thoughts regarding sexual assault for many members of our campus community,” reads the petition in part. “While it may appear humorous, or thought-provoking to some, it has already become a source of undue stress for many Wellesley College students, the majority of whom live, study, and work in this space.” More than 300 students at the women’s liberal-arts college have asked that it be removed. But the naked paintings and sculptures of Trump are celebrated?

Viewing Friday the thirteenth as unlucky “According to the Feminist Internet, Friday the 13th being considered ‘unlucky’ is apparently a manifestation of the patriarchy because Friday is the only day of the week named after a female goddess, and a group of 13 women was considered to be a coven of witches approximately 9 billion years ago.”

The phrase “too much information” According to feminist icon Lena Dunham, “TMI” is used to belittle women’s experiences, where as men are rewarded with for their sharing.

Calling Hillary Clinton “shrill” Calling Hillary Clinton “shrill” is a gendered attack, according to feminists.

Calling a woman “pretty” This is another form of “benevolent sexism.” Men call women pretty to emphasize that all they are worth is their appearance.

The SATs According to The New York Times, SAT testing may feature questions that are viewed as “stereotype threats.” For instance, one math question show that more boys than girls in math classes. Females will apparently lose self-worth over such a “microaggression.”

The “kiss cam” The “kiss cam” clearly acts to perpetuation “misogyny” and “can sexually disempower women” by making women feel obligated to a man.

The Olympics Some sexist announcers covering the Olympics had the audacity to mention that female athletes had children; some even credited a male coach for coaching. 

Denying the mythical gender pay gap If you don’t buy into the debunked gender pay-gap myth, you obviously hate women and want them to be paid less than men, according to feminists.

Denying the mythical “rape culture”Denying the politicized and exaggerated “rape culture” means you’re a sexist who doesn’t want to combat rape.

Being pro-life If you believe that babies should not be killed in the womb, you actually hate “empowered women.”

Being a Republican And of course: All Republicans are sexist woman-haters, just ask disgraced DNC chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.

Let me guess, these women aren’t feminists or they may not exist altogether? You claim you’re deep in the movement, maybe that’s why you’re denying the facts, as usual. Fuck off

[loudlytransparenttrash]

The Fascism of Feminism

Feminism is in a lot of ways like fascism which is why I found it quite amusing and ironic to see feminists marching around with anti-fascism signs. 

Your average fascist will disregard any scientific argument unless the conclusion supports his existing belief. The ideology comes first and the fascist looks for anything to back it up, no matter how trivial, unreliable or discredited. Much like today's feminists and their ideology, right? 

Fascists attempt to rationalize their beliefs and portray them as truth by twisting the facts or fabricating them altogether. A fascist might, for example, cast blame for unemployment and work discontent on immigrants "stealing" their jobs. Feminists similarly cast blame for their lack of employment and work discontent onto the evil, sexist, misogynist “patriarchy” (men) who are keeping them down and out while ignoring the fact that their gender studies degrees doesn’t take them very far. Both feminists and fascists are quick to cast blame on someone else for anything that goes wrong in their lives.

There are many forms of fascism, people seeking to impose their will on others, some are obvious, while some masquerade as something far less sinister. Feminism belongs to the latter. Who can argue with the pursuit of equality and justice for all in society? 

Their cause appears worthy at first glance, but scratch beneath the surface and their true agenda reveals itself to be something more sinister and hateful. The perpetrators of this form of fascism have suffered no repression in their lifetime yet seek revenge on modern men for past oppression, to consign men to their status as second class citizens. Equality is the last thing these feminists want. 

Like all fascists they want ultimate control. Their objective is to unconditionally support women, and to attack and vilify men at any given opportunity. Their ultimate goal is to repress and undermine masculinity, to feminize boys and men. There is no rationale underpinning their philosophy. This form of fascism like all others is built on scapegoating, fear, subjugation, and control. Men are demonized and persecuted by feminists, their culture is not merely pro-women but anti-men. 

Men are their scapegoats, portrayed as cruel, aggressive, war mongers, wife beaters, paedophiles and sex obsessed neanderthals, while they are the innocent victims in a cruel, aggressive, destructive society created by men. The many women who deny their oppression and victimhood? Well these women are just trying to impress their torturers and they really have internalized misogyny by being manipulated by men. 

Feminists seek to create a society where women have the freedom to say and do as they please, while men are restricted and controlled in their behavior. One rule for them, and one for us. This is manifesting itself right now, in the law courts, our colleges, in employment, in domestic situations, in the media, and in society as a whole. Anyone who disagrees with the irrational, biased rhetoric propagated by feminists is met with derision and spite, and is obstinately dismissed as a misogynist. 

There is no freedom of speech or expression in a fascist society and there isn’t with feminists. These women are committing hate crimes, propagating their own brand of dictatorial ideology. It is vital that we stand up to the tyranny of feminist fascism, to prevent it entering mainstream culture any more than it has. It’s time to look at the issues closely related to feminist campaigning, providing gender balance on subjects such as domestic violence, dispelling feminist myths, while analyzing the behaviour of men and women in 21st century America.

There are a growing number of feminist organisations and ‘charities’ in the U.S and U.K, all with varying degrees of hostility and bigotry. This form of fascism is growing at an unprecedented rate due mainly to the rise of the internet, and their influence has strongly grown. 

Anti-male and anti-white rhetoric is reaching out to a wider audience, brainwashing young impressionable, often vulnerable women like never before. Feminist are grooming naive young women into viewing men as their enemy in society, a symbol of their fears, failures and perceived repression, disseminating fear and anti-male propaganda in the process. 

The rhetoric on these feminists is similar in nature to racism, religious extremism, homophobia, and anti-semitism, yet this form of stealth fascism appears acceptable to the authorities, even though the impact on society and on men is equally harmful. 

Misguided feminist campaigners immerse themselves in this self-centred, narrow world of campaigning, seeking out cases of perceived sexism and injustice towards women, while their grip on reality becomes ever more tenuous. They’re not interested in asking men what they think, they just want revenge on innocent men targeted simply because of their gender. There are no principles or ethics underlying their objectives, it’s a case of unconditionally supporting women who agree with them, while attacking the behaviour of men, demonstrating an appalling level of arrogance in the process. 

These women show no remorse or guilt for their actions, as they are too self absorbed to understand the hypocrisy they display. The accessibility of the internet has allowed men an insight into the minds of these feminists, and very shocking and disturbing it is too.

It is not healthy for a man to view these sites, and it’s certainly not healthy for a woman to immerse herself in the narrow-minded world of feminist campaigning. It will impact on their relationships at home and in the workplace. These feminist views are negative enough to drain anyone’s sou and it harms their social perception. 

Equality and gender politics is a subject which can only be studied synchronically. Historical examination is only clouding people’s judgement. The fact that women couldn’t vote a hundred years ago is irrelevant to new generations of men and women, and references to this past oppression will give rise to hostility and revenge. 

Most oppression throughout history has in fact related to class, not gender, and the vast majority of men have been treated far worse than women, and had been afforded less protection than many women higher in status. Industrialisation is built on the exploitation of working class men, and many couldn’t vote because they were considered illiterate and uneducated. America’s wealth and freedoms, which these feminists take for granted is built on the exploitation of men, NOT women.

It is important to consider the psychology of the modern feminist campaigner. Many members of feminist groups and women’s organisations suffer from delusions of persecution. Many have emotional problems, suffering from anxiety, stress, depression and they want someone to blame, yet they fail to look within themselves for the source of their problems and failures. 

Paranoia is rife. They seek scapegoats for their personal failings and emotional problems like any fascists, racists or homophobics do. The mindset of the feminist fascist is much the same. Many unsuccessful or unhappy people project their own failings onto different social groups in society, sub-consciously blaming others for their own personal issues. It’s a common psychological process and feminists are no different. 

This scapegoating invariably leads to persecution. Many of these feminist campaigners have an irrational fear of men, and want to create a more feminized society where men are demasculated and controlled. They attempt to hijack every issue, and are only capable of viewing these issues from a self-interested, narrow-minded perspective. 

These feminists are not interested in men’s and anti-feminist women’s opinions or understanding their emotions, they just make narrow-minded assumptions, feeding off each others ignorance, hate and paranoia. 

Leaders of feminist groups, especially the more accessible social network sites frighten and manipulate young women into seeing men as the enemy, exploiting their fears and fuelling their paranoia. Every man is a potential killer, rapist, sex offender or paedophile in their eyes, and this irrational fear is inherited by young impressionable women who may think the causes are just. 

It’s a form of grooming which needs to be urgently addressed. Many influential feminists appear to revel in creating a barrier between men and women, fortifying it at any given opportunity, failing to understand the dynamic between men and women as a result of their own sexual orientation. 

These humorless, profoundly negative women need a war, a fight to give their life meaning. No matter how powerful women become in society, these feminists will always pursue this agenda. If these campaigners are so intelligent and so useful, why don’t they contribute to society instead of consuming much of their time seeking out perceived sexism on the internet? How useful are these feminists in society? They certainly don’t help society by propagating hate, and I doubt they help the majority of fair-minded women. 

They seem to have so much campaigning time as a result of their misanthropic tendencies but seem unable to put their rhetoric into practice. They are destructive, not constructive people. Their motivation is negative, not positive. Healthy women do NOT become feminists. Most women are NOT feminists. Women are more likely to succeed in life if they haven’t been brainwashed with stifling feminist dogma. It gives them an excuse for failure, a reason not to try, and a persecution complex. Most women will grow out of feminist campaigning by their early/mid twenties, as they realise that sitting at a computer, developing a persecution and victim complex does nothing to further their career, or their emotional development.

Some feminist organisations campaign vociferously against men’s playful, gentle ‘sexism’ which often involves complementing women on their physical appearance, celebrating the female form as art has always done, yet they seem oblivious to their own brand of harmful, spiteful, sadistic sexism, intended to make men feel inadequate, useless, and humiliated. 

They believe women are viewed as sex objects in the media, yet men’s magazines are far less harmful than women’s gossip magazines, which show nasty undercover photographs of women with cellulite, or without make-up intended to humiliate the celebrity and comfort the lesser attractive readers.  Their agenda is bitchy and spiteful, an attack on women, not a celebration.

The campaign against men’s magazines by feminists groups is a prime example of their controlling, fascist agenda. They believe that photos of semi-naked women cause men to act violently towards women. This clearly demonstrates their contempt and lack of understanding of men. By their own terms, violence by women towards men must result from sexual images of men in girl’s and women’s magazines too then? Or does this psychological phenomenon not affect women? There are many semi-naked images of boy bands and sports stars in these publications. Maybe the content in women’s magazines creates a profoundly negative perception of men which we find offensive? Do they consider this? 

Clearly some women are intolerant of men interacting with women in a sexual way. This could easily be construed as heterophobia. Who decides what is pornographic, art, or fashion? Feminist extremists? Just because we don’t like something that doesn’t mean it should be banned. I’m sure many people are offended by hunting magazines in supermarkets showing carcasses resulting from ‘sporting’ endeavours. Some supermarkets have felt compelled to remove men’s magazines from their shelves as a result of legal threats and bullying by these feminist organisations. They even claim that female supermarket workers are being sexually harassed by being in the presence of these magazines...

Unfortunately the irony seemed lost on them. Many women and girls watch sports or are fans of their favorite artists because they are sexually attracted to them, they have half naked posters of athletes or actors or singers on their walls and throughout their phones but when men do this they are considered shallow and sexist. 

These feminists never campaign when lesbians letch over other women and view them as sex objects and when women latch over men and view them as sex objects. Attacking men is their only motivation. These feminists drown in the bile of their own hypocrisy. They believe women are exploited by men. In fact, men are exploited by women for children, money, power and status. 

Maybe these feminist campaign groups who like to pretend they know everything about the behavior of men should visit a modern hen night or nightclub to observe women’s behaviour. The hypocrisy is staggering.

As we have seen for many years and it has never been more blatant today, feminism is an anti-democratic organisation which believes that only women should be at the centre of politics, only a woman should be in power, which clearly demonstrates a desire for self-righteous control, and not equality. 

[loudlytransparenttrash]

The reality of feminism

Feminists themselves say that they are a movement for gender equality without batting an eye. To them, it is such a normal and simple thing that they can’t believe they have to explain themselves. But of course, action speaks louder than words. You must understand that what feminists claim their movement is supposed to be and what it actually is are two completely different things. 

The plain truth is that: Feminism has never been a movement for equality. Feminism has always been about maximizing women's power at the expense of men. The feminists want: special treatment just by crying victim, privileges without responsibility, advantages just for being a female, government protection and funding, and for men to serve their every fickle whims and demands. Simply put, they want a world that revolves around them. And of course, they will deny this. When have they ever admitted to the truth? I would actually be disappointed if they told the truth about their own nature. Instead, they lie with even greater emotional hysteria and cower behind the word ‘equality’ as usual. 

The reason this lie of ‘equality’ is repeated over and over again by them is because no one would accept its hateful and toxic ideology at its face value. Feminism had to be sugar-coated with the ideals of liberation, freedom, and equality so that the general public would swallow it. And so it happened: everyone from naive women and women with chip on their shoulders to groveling men bought into the ugly lie of feminism. And feminism is a movement that can only exist through lies. Feminism needs deception as much as fish needs water, for its entire ideology is based on twisted facts. And there are no ends to the lies, the double-standards, and the hypocrisy of feminism:

• Feminists have distorted history to make it appear as though they’ve been exclusively oppressed throughout the ages.  • Feminists continue to lie about the wage gap, which has already been debunked many times over. • Feminists lie about rape statistics to whip up the hysteria of “rape culture” to shame, control, and subjugate men. • Feminists complain about how men slut-shaming women when women are, by far, more judgemental of each other's sexual ventures. • Feminists complain about how there aren't enough women in the tech field when, in fact, women are twice more likely to be hired for STEM faculty positions. • Feminists continually drone about violence against women, but they say nothing about the violence against men who are far more likely to be victims in all types of violence. (Why not campaign to stop all violence?) • Feminists complain about non-existent biases against women, but they remain completely silent to alt the biases against men within the legal system from divorce settlements to sentencing for crimes. There are countless examples of women getting away with crimes that men would be punished for which they also conveniently ignore. • Feminists whine non-stop about how there aren't enough women in science and engineering programs, ignoring the fact that women are less likely to opt for it by choice, and also ignoring the fact that women dominate almost all other fields in colleges and universities. To them, having far more women in post-secondary education than men is progress while having more men than women in one specific field is a sign of institutional sexism. • Feminists have done nothing to ensure "equality" for men other than to spread sickening lies, treat them all like potential rapists, harass and attack them, and send death threats and rape threats, yet they want men to take action to do more to help their cause and play a supplicating role to them.

And this is only the beginning. It doesn't matter how many of the above facts you point out to a feminist, she just will not care. She will rationalize them, downplay them, or just flat out ignore them, but she will never accept them. The only thing feminists will do in the face of truth is to double down on their victim rhetoric and scream "sexism" and 'misogynist' to shut you down. Feminists love telling people, especially men, how to think, talk, and behave, but they will not tolerate an ounce of disagreement from a man even if he was a feminist himself. 

You have to understand that these are not sensible human beings that we're dealing with. Many feminists are manipulative and full of spite, zealously looking for men to blame their problems on. Feminism is akin to a cult where its members vent out their blind hatred through their collective hysteria and emotionally directed delusions. 

I cannot emphasize enough just how unimportant the truth is to the feminists. Truth is a mere obstacle as the only thing that matters to them is themselves. The all-important question for them is: Does this further the agenda of expanding women's power while diminishing men's? If the answer to that question is a 'yes', the feminists will not be concerned whether it is the truth or not. They will tell the truth if it serves their purpose and they will tell lies if it maximizes women's power while decreasing their responsibility. Expecting feminists to be honest is as vain as expecting birds to mind where they shit - they simply don't care. 

And I don't believe that feminists themselves understand their own nature. They are delusional to a point of believing in their own lies. Their rational mind is either not functioning properly or have been hijacked by their unstable emotionality. They seem to be living in their own bubbles that cannot be penetrated by the truth, and their weakness and fragility to the real world only serves to cement their group-think. It’s no wonder they believe in something as ludicrous as the “Patriarchy” even as they live in a society that pampers them like children.

The reason they save their most vile hatred for the men's rights groups is because they see them as competitors for the victim olympics. How dare do men ask for rights? There is only a finite supply of victim-privileges given out by society and the feminists can’t stand having competitors who threaten their monopoly.

These same feminists whose entire movement is based on playing the victim will mock any men for adapting to the social situation and using the same tactics as them. Suddenly, when they see others playing the victim, the ludicrousness of it all becomes apparent, but they can’t seem to hold up the mirror to see their own ludicrous existence. Perhaps like Medusa, they implicitly understand that it will be fatal.

Know that feminists are noxious and emotionally unstable individuals who use their equally demented ideology to vent out their rage out onto men. The irony is, they don't even seem to be aware that their entire existence is possible because of all the powerful men in governments and corporations who support them. Do they really expect to be able to harass and attack men on their own without taking advantage of the system and other supplicating men? But as rve said in the beginning, hypocrisy is a fundamental trait of feminists. They will continue to attack men as they get support from them at the same time. There is no irony or contradiction here. 

And what do these feminists want exactly? To understand the kind of world these feminists want to create, you only have to look at the direction the feminist infested societies are heading towards.

We already live in a society that expels men from universities without an evidence or due process with a mere accusation of rape. We live in a society where women can destroy a man's career, reputation, and life just for arguing with her on social media. We live in a society where a man will be charged for rape just for walking past a woman. This is the kind of world we already live in, and the feminists are campaigning to make everything even worse for men just for the crime of being men. 

Will feminists ever be satisfied? No. Since their true goal is not equality, they will never be satisfied no matter how much they're given. You give into one of their demands and they will conjure up ten new ones. They're continuously on the search for new things to get offended by, new ways to police and restrict people, and new ways to define sexism and rape to perpetuate their eternal victimhood. This is a movement with a bottomless pit that will devour any and all notion of human decency. 

From all my experiences interacting with feminists, I have decided that the great majority of them are either emotional vampires who drain your energy to feed their own egos or just complete human trash who exist only to put men down, thus making up for their own insecurities. 

Feminists have destroyed the relationship between the sexes and like any other extremists, they have even attacked the group they're supposedly advocating for: other women, for not accepting their dogma. I don't think feminism will go away completely anytime soon as long as the current socio-cultural system remains intact and as long as their daddy government supports their movement but we have started to see their demise with the country standing up to the social justice circus, they know their movement is slowly dying and just like any feral animal that’s been kicked to the side and waiting for its death, we are seeing them lash out more than viciously than ever but it’s only a matter of time before they collapse. 

In the meantime, I think the best way to fight back against feminism is to laugh at their tantrums and buzzword insults and keep telling the truth so that decent men and women around the world can see it for the disease that it is.