[TW: Discussion of rape] “Ever notice feminism is all about increasing women’s rights without addressing any of the responsibilities? Like having equal part in the draft or being in combat. It’s all well and good to complain about not being equal but all they need to do is step up”
Firstly, as far as I’m aware, a large part of the feminist movement is against the wars the West are waging in other areas of the world. Many are pacifists entirely. In any case, although women may have apparently equal access to jobs in the military, women in the US military are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed in Iraq. It’s one thing to be apparently legally allowed to do something, but when you’re not socially allowed, and when your legal claims are ignored, the on-paper equality is meaningless.
Women are very rarely at the helm of war advances, but they suffer incredible harm from it. Sexual violence is one of the key ways in which women’s lives are devastated from war. Already unequal societies put women who have been made single by war into incredibly desperate situations, especially those who have children. Even if they are able to find some kind of work that isn’t in the sex industry, the average pay-gap around the world is 17%, so women are already losing.
I don’t know where you’re getting this idea that women don’t want responsibilities. No Women No Peace are campaigning for women to be included in peace-building. No woman has ever been put in charge of peace talks, and they represent only 8% of participants. Although a large number of the protesters at Tahrir Square were women (according to female witnesses, around 45% of the protesters in the square were female), they have been entirely excluded from the peace-making process, and shaping the future of the country.
I could go on, but it is really time for you to do the work in comprehending this properly.
You need to take a harder look at what you’re talking about. If all women need to do is ‘step up’, then why aren’t they doing it? Or is it more than a case of ‘stepping up’? Is the reality much more difficult than you are willing to believe? Take a step back, look at the real reasons that women aren’t involved, and then work at changing it, rather than sitting on the sidelines talking about things that you haven’t taken the time to fully understand.
franklin-delano-roosevelt-deact asked: Hey! I just found your blog and I adore it. I've followed plenty of other feminist blogs before, but this one seems to be most interesting. =]
Thank you! It’s lovely to get messages like this :)
I don’t post as much as most of the other feminist blogs out there, so make sure you keep following them too!
champagnecandy:meredithclark:notsonewhere:superseventies:
Writers Angela Davis and Toni Morrison.
(Source: vintageanchor)
Trigger warning: Bigoted language, discussions of rape, assault, and violence.
[NOTE: This article is about — and hence contains copious examples of — violent, highly triggering, and bigoted language. When the slur isn’t something connected to my own identity, I have tried to bleep it with asterisks.]
#MenCallMeThings has taken off, in these past few days. I didn’t expect it — if I had, I would have put more work into it than a simple Rebecca Solnit rip-off and a few top-of-my-head quotes — but then, I shouldn’t have been surprised. And, since it’s taken off, there’s been lots of coverage: requests for interviews (which I’ve turned down, as I’m on too many of my own deadlines at the moment, and also don’t want to be Face-Of-The-Movementing again any time soon or, you know, ever), op-ed pieces, meditations on Men Call Me Things As Phenomenon. And, of course, plenty of those op-eds have been about precisely what we set out to protest: The idea that the Internet is “equally mean to everyone,” that putting up with name-calling was something “everyone” had to do in the same way and at the same intensity and volume, the idea that “Internet cruelty” (whatever that means) isn’t gendered.
(*)The title of this blog post is taken from a (NSFW) tumblr.
I spent yesterday at Fem11, the feminist conference organised by UK Feminista. It was great to be in a room with a thousand other feminists, and you know your event is successful when the hashtag on Twitter attracts both trolls and spammers. Sessions at the conference covered a wide variety of subjects, from violence against women, through abortion and the plight of asylum seekers. As usual, I wished there were two of me so I could attend more of the sessions.
There were a few themes through the day, but the one that really struck me was around sexualisation, objectification and the sex industry. The opening session had Cllr Rania Khan speaking about her campaign against lapdancing clubs, Isabella Woolford Diaz telling us about tackling lads’ mags in Tesco, and Bjorn Suttka introducing the Anti-Porn Men Project. The absolutely packed workshop on ending violence against women covered a lot of ground, including exploring the role of sexualisation and objectification of women in creating an environment conducive to violence against women.
McDonald’s: Change your sexist packaging
This petition has been created and submitted by Jadeforshort for the UK branch of Mcdonald’s to alter their sexist packaging.
Their current packaging is offensive as it shows women to be the only ‘calorie counters’. It gives the total calorie intake for women but there is no mention of men’s calorie intake. Their packaging also has the internationally-used woman symbol on it, with no sign of the male counterpart. Calorie intakes are important for everyone; not just women. This packaging depicts women as ‘weight watchers’ and besides the clear sexism it doesn’t accurately show the percentage of total intake of fat, carbs, protein, etc., for an average male.
cwnl:
Individual’s Sexism Leads to Gender Inequality In Whole Society
Individual beliefs don’t stay confined to the person who has them; they can affect how a society functions. A new study published in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, looks at 57 countries and finds that an individual’s sexism leads to gender inequality in the society as a whole—not surprising, but it is the largest study to find this relationship.
“I’m interested in the consequences people’s beliefs about how the world should work and how the world does work,” says Mark Brandt of DePaul University, the author of the new study. For this study on sexism, he used data from an international survey conducted between 2005 and 2007. The survey included two statements to measure sexism: “On the whole, men make better political leaders than women do” and “On the whole, men make better business executives than women do.” He also used a United Nations measure of gender inequality, from the year the sexism question was asked and from 2009
Brandt found that sexism was directly associated with increases in gender inequality overtime.
“You could get the impression that having sexist beliefs, or prejudiced beliefs more generally, is just an individual thing—‘my beliefs don’t impact you,’” Brandt says. But this study shows that isn’t true. If individual people in a society are sexist, men and women in that society become less equal.
“Gender inequality is such a tough beast to crack because there are so many contributing factors,” Brandt says. Policies can contribute to inequality—and some countries have insured some measure of equality by mandating that some number of seats in the legislature be reserved for women. But this study suggests that if the goal is increased equality, individual attitudes have to change.
good study!
lawagner asked fuckyeahfeminists:
I asked my boyfriend to read the article about gaslighting. One of his first reactions was that he wishes it came from a less feministic or “unbiased” perspective…. basically that it can happen to males as well. I was slightly annoyed by his wording, but I do partially agree. I feel like males commonly have that reaction about feminism, that it is biased. What do you think is the best way to explain that that is not the case?
To Readers - here is the article we are referring to
Well, first of all, it is practically impossible to read something that is completely objective. So I wonder why he wanted it to be less feminist? Is it because it makes him feel uncomfortable because it hits close to home and he’s done those things?
One of my pet peeves is when there is an article -ONE ARTICLE- that talks about ONE point of view, i.e. something that happens to women - and guys go BUT WHAT ABOUT THE MENZ!!! Sorry, but there is no need or obligation for someone to write about something pertaining disproportionately to women and include a section about men.
What I like what the article you mention is not that he says gaslighting only happens to women, but rather how it has been so normalized due to sexism in our culture, which is something men do not and cannot experience. I have been the victim of gaslighting and let me tell you - there is sure a double standard that allows gaslighting to happen and for men “in solidarity” to support and encourage and believe it while a victim is left totally dis-empowered.
Gaslighting is something that happens often in abusive relationships and whether we like to admit it or not, most abuse is men towards women, just like most rape is men against women. By acknowledging this we are not saying that rape and abuse do not happen to men, but for us to effectively eradicate these horrible acts (just like gaslighting!) we have to acknowledge how it is dispropotionately perpetuated.
So I would try to explain these things to your boyfriend. I think the point is to ask them to not have a kneejerk reaction against something that stands up for women for once. Shouldn’t he be more concerned that there are so many people being hurt by gaslighting than being concerned that it is written in such a feminist way?
The author also explains why, as a man, he chooses to write about women’s issues. Perhaps this bit of background may help.
Also check out Yashar Ali’s followup to the article.
