THIS.

  • Man: I had my heart broken once by a girl who friendzoned me, so now I hate women. It's not my fault, they're just cold-hearted and stupid.
  • Mens Rights Activists: I don't see a problem with this.
  • Woman: I say I hate men because I've been physically/sexually abused, harassed on the street, made to feel inferior or have experienced domestic violence, and have had the weight of an entire social system of oppression forced on me since birth.
  • Mens Rights Activist: You're a fucking sexist! Not all men are like that! Why do you hate equality? You're a bad person! Get back in the kitchen! Fucking women.

So Nigel Farage, UKIP party leader, said that people shouting over his speech are trying to “stifle” freedom of speech.

I think you have  little misunderstanding of the basic concept of freedom of speech there, Farage.

aloverthatsighs:

This body of work is an exploration of the extent of cultural appropriation and encourages a discussion about it. I give the appropriator and the appropriated the opportunity to defend themselves and create a dialogue between them, while maintaining a neutral stance myself. I am not attacking those who appropriate, merely educating and creating awareness. I’m also exploring appropriation myself, and discovering the carying degrees of it within this visual conversation.

I’d like to make this a long term exploration, with a lot more participants as a form of generation-wide debate. If you’d like to be photographed to add your point of view, please do not hesitate to pop me a message here or an email at sanaahamid@yahoo.com and we could work something out!

hmmmmmm I feel a bit wied about a cross being included in this project. christiantity has never been oppressed, in my society. eople ae not profiled, ersectured, and massacerd for wearing a cross, nor is there any hisry of that, and that makes a MASSIVE differenc. an athiest wearing  a cross may be offensive to a christian, but a white chick wearing a bindi is more thn just offensive, it´s harmful. you´re dispaying your rivilege as a white person hat you can wa  to be cute and qurky, while another woman in th sam country is unable to exress her identity for far of harrasmet or assult.

having something appropriated by white people for fun/fashion, while we live in a society that oppress the people to whom that bindi/turban/keffiyah is an integral part of their cultra identity, reduces their ability for exression and is a remider of prevalent racism and under representation.

I am white, so  am in NO WAY an authrity n any of this. as always, please tell me if i have got this wrong, or missed something important.

dissimilarto:

when a trans* person gets upset because you have misgendered/degendered them, it isn’t because you “offended” them. You harmed them.

Being degendered happens to many trans* and genderqueer people ALL THE TIME. It’s a (micro)aggression we face constantly.

You didn’t offend them, you harmed them. You created an injury. There’s a big difference.

triviabitch:

the fact that people seriously debate whether gentrification exists and whether its a good or bad thing makes it pretty clear how many people value white people’s comfort and access to wine bars and artisanal cheese over POCs ability to, you know, live indoors

we are not talking about overcrowding or lack of housing, we’re talking about homes being demolished to make space for a Whole Foods, and POC being forced out of the city once the rent skyrockets

"Guyland sets the terms under which girls try to claim their own agency, develop their own senses of self. Guyland sets the terms of friendship, of sexual activity, of who is ‘in’ and who is decidedly ‘out.’ Girls can even be guys — if they know something about sports (but not too much), enjoy causal banter about sex (but not too actively), and dress and act in ways that are pleasantly unthreatening to boys’ fragile sense of masculinity."
Michael Kimmel, Guyland (via craneyourneck)
"Male privilege is “I have a boyfriend” being the only thing that can actually stop someone from hitting on you because they respect another male-bodied person more than they respect your rejection/lack of interest."

The Sociological Cinema

There was actually research that was done that found that women who used an “I have a boyfriend/husband” excuse to reject unwanted sexual attention and harassment by their bosses were more likely to be left alone than those who used any other excuse (including “I’m not interested”)

A message from videopodcastnetwork
Hey there, don't miss Lizz Winstead on tonight's Adam Carolla podcast here on the VPN. Watch on our YouTube channel at 7PST!

uh wut

thefrogman:

I believe that there are a small group of women who hate men just for being men. I believe that the textbook definition of the word misandry fits that description. I believe there are bad things that happen to men. I believe those issues should be addressed. I do not believe that a fringe group of women who hate men can be blamed for those issues. 
Misandry was a dead word until recently. A group of men who feared the progress of feminism revived the word and used it to undercut the movement. They like having the power being a man provides and they don’t want to lose that. So they created a movement, found a bunch of legitimate issues that affect men, and tried to blame women for those issues. They called this misandry. It’s like conservatives using buzzwords like “death panels” to make people fear health care. They let people assume it meant Obama wanted to kill your grandma. They let their cute little phrase infect the minds of good people and convince them of falsehoods. 
People are telling me that men cannot report rape without getting laughed at. They say this is misandry. It is the fault of women who hate men. But that just doesn’t make any sense to me. When I seek a logical explanation, it seems more likely that this is because men are supposed to be strong and women are supposed to be weak. And rape has been viewed as something that happens mostly to women. So if it does happen to a man, they must be weak. How did this idea of men=strong and women=weak start? I’m pretty sure it wasn’t because of misandry. It is an ancient patriarchy collapsing in on itself. 
Feminism is about fighting inequality. It’s about erasing the strong/weak perception ingrained into our society. Misandry, as the term is often used today, is about trying to blame women for anything bad that happens to men.
If you want to fight to fix issues that affect men, go for it. But I would really consider distancing yourself from this term. It is used to evangelize folks into a movement that is very problematic. A group that can’t handle scrutiny of their comic books and video games, so they send death and rape threats. A group that calls women sluts and think they ask for rape if they show too much cleavage. Those are the people who coined this term, and you should want nothing to do with them or their language.

thefrogman:

I believe that there are a small group of women who hate men just for being men. I believe that the textbook definition of the word misandry fits that description. I believe there are bad things that happen to men. I believe those issues should be addressed. I do not believe that a fringe group of women who hate men can be blamed for those issues. 

Misandry was a dead word until recently. A group of men who feared the progress of feminism revived the word and used it to undercut the movement. They like having the power being a man provides and they don’t want to lose that. So they created a movement, found a bunch of legitimate issues that affect men, and tried to blame women for those issues. They called this misandry. It’s like conservatives using buzzwords like “death panels” to make people fear health care. They let people assume it meant Obama wanted to kill your grandma. They let their cute little phrase infect the minds of good people and convince them of falsehoods. 

People are telling me that men cannot report rape without getting laughed at. They say this is misandry. It is the fault of women who hate men. But that just doesn’t make any sense to me. When I seek a logical explanation, it seems more likely that this is because men are supposed to be strong and women are supposed to be weak. And rape has been viewed as something that happens mostly to women. So if it does happen to a man, they must be weak. How did this idea of men=strong and women=weak start? I’m pretty sure it wasn’t because of misandry. It is an ancient patriarchy collapsing in on itself. 

Feminism is about fighting inequality. It’s about erasing the strong/weak perception ingrained into our society. Misandry, as the term is often used today, is about trying to blame women for anything bad that happens to men.

If you want to fight to fix issues that affect men, go for it. But I would really consider distancing yourself from this term. It is used to evangelize folks into a movement that is very problematic. A group that can’t handle scrutiny of their comic books and video games, so they send death and rape threats. A group that calls women sluts and think they ask for rape if they show too much cleavage. Those are the people who coined this term, and you should want nothing to do with them or their language.

grrrlfever:

you keep saying “we’re all human” but all i hear is “i want to completely ignore institutionalised oppression and shut my eyes and pretend everyone is treated equally to escape the guilt of the numerous privileges i’m afforded”

bonapartist:

so i was looking up stuff about birth control throughout history and

image

i should probably stop posting elephant tattoos at some point but I DON´T WANNA

i should probably stop posting elephant tattoos at some point but I DON´T WANNA