Anonymous asked: I think it would be better if there were none of the feminists that blame everything on men and wish genocide on them. They want equality, but get upset when they get treated like men. I much prefer those women who actually believe what feminism was originally meant for. Hating men (especially trans* individuals) =/= equality, and they are setting their own movement back. Just my opinion though, so I could be wrong or dumb with my wording...
most “men hate” people see is strictly satire tho like i hardly ever see LEGITIMATE MAN HATE and tbh i think people just want a reason to hate the feminist movement. and the small percentage of feminists who do really hate men, the only thing they do is just annoy, they are no real threat to the male population as a whole
one of my fave quotes is “misandry irritates, misogyny kills”
Anonymous asked: why are you a feminist???
because people are still asking that question
because women are payed less than men in approximately 99% of professions
because chris brown can still have a career after assaulting rihanna but miley cyrus takes her clothes off and there’s a huge scandal
because of this:
because currently it is estimated ten million more girls are out of education than boys (x)
because we’re expected to be mature but hairless like a child, in control but not bossy, sexy but not slutty and definitely not a prude, intelligent but not opinionated, independent but reliant on men, natural but look like the girl in the magazine etc etc
because being called a girl, a pussy or a bitch is an insult
because when i told my mum i refused to get anything less than a’s in my exams she told me it wasn’t ladylike to be so cocky
because my brother and 90% of my male friends think girls who wear revealing clothing are asking for rape
because every person who identifies as female should be allowed to choose if they want to get married, have kids, have a career, go to uni etc etc without expectations
because tampons and sanitary pads are stupidly expensive
because some people reading this will have flinched at the fact i just said ‘tampon’
because there are men out there whose job it is to make young girls feel like absolute shit about themselves just so they can sell the next best beauty product
because female masturbation isn’t considered normal whilst men can talk about their own penises for hours on end
because feminists are still seen as crazy lesbians who dont shave and some still feel like they have to defend themselves by claiming theyre not any of those things when in fact if i want to be a passionate lady who likes other ladies and cant be bothered to shave my legs every twenty minutes then thats my choice and if i want to be someone who wears make up and shaves and goes out partying then thats my choice and if i want to be a combination of the two or anything in between then thats. my. choice.
because i believe anyone who identifies as female is fucking badass and deserves the same rights as every privileged stuck up old white man sitting around and making laws about our bodies
because how can you not be
"I can’t even begin to understand women" well generally I start by treating them like individual human beings rather than a collective consciousness and then go from there
The concept of “the passivity of good men” has always rankled me. If you’re passive about things that are this important, you aren’t good. Either accept that or change your behavior (via admiralobvious)
— It is my hypothesis that if the current cultural push to include more women in STEM fields is successful, in the next twenty years we will see a gradual but dramatic tapering of salaries, as well as the general cultural cachet of sciences and engineering.
…my immediate reaction to that last comment was “But…we STEM grads have valuable skills! And are really…uh…crap.” Hellooo internalised sexism.
"While funneling more women into STEM fields may produce marginal gains, it actually leaves the underlying issue — male privilege — largely untouched."
It is well-documented that, as more women enter a field, that field becomes devalued both socially and monetarily. Secretaries, librarians, teachers: all were once male-dominated professions, with higher pay scales and higher status levels. So yes, all of this commentary. The problem is not that there aren’t enough women in science. The problem is that “women’s work”, whatever that work may be, is undervalued.
Tumblr feminism leaves me feeling so conflicted sometimes. Like on one hand we have the message that women can do whatever they want, be whoever they want, say whatever they want, act anyway they want, and dress which ever way they want. But then on the other hand we get the message saying that women shouldn’t be portrayed as being sexual, especially in the media. But what about women who choose to be seen as sexual/ sexual objects? Feminism is about choice. I think we sometimes over think things and get all discombobulated with the way we think we are supposed to think. (I said ‘think’ way too many times, I know).You get me?
Believe me, I get it. I love feminism and I know how much our world needs it. And I know it’s difficult, but does anyone else feel the same way; there are so many mixed messages out there. Hmmm.
Please be kind, this isn’t meant to be an attack or anything like that.
I see what you are saying.
Here’s how I see it: there is nothing wrong with a woman (who is of age) being portrayed as sexual as long as it is clearly her choice to be sexual and isn’t done so to satisfy the gaze of a cishet male viewer alone.
When a woman is sexual because it gives her pleasure and is not hurting anybody else, there isn’t a problem.
But then there is stuff like those ridiculous games/comics/etc where, say, warrior women have impossible proportions (very thin with a tiny waist, yet incredibly large breasts/butt/etc) and are wearing chain mail bikinis into battle. Usually, she is not expressing her sexuality in a positive way, but it wearing a completely impractical outfit that is made so the viewer can ogle her. In these cases, you can be 98% sure the male characters are in clothes that make more sense.
But yeah, I agree that there are a lot of mixed messages and it’s very confusing sometimes.
What LF said
It’s not always well articulated, and not all feminists agree either, but it really boils down to the subject/object divide. Is the woman in question behaving as a sexual subject (is her sexual behavior about and for her?) or is she being treated as a sexual object (is sexiness being projected onto her, is she being reduced to a collection of sexualized body parts?)
There’s a lot of scholarship about this divide, but you can generally spot the difference in media— an athlete may pose nude, but she’ll be in a dynamic shot that showcases her power as a subject, and what she chooses to do with her body. Her nudity is still sexual and sexy, but in an entirely different way that hasn’t reduced her to an object.
Models who are photographed in poses that make them look mostly dead, surrounded by clothes and other objects are passive and are themselves intended to be viewed as beautiful objects, their sexuality is being associated with an object for sale, rather than with them— flip through a magazine and look for photos of legs, butts, cleavage, and so on— those are parts that have been reduced to sexual objects that have nothing to do with the desire, power, or subjective experience of the person they belong to.
Objectification is *not* about what women choose— it’s the opposite, it’s about the outside gaze (the hetero male gaze), removing a woman’s subjectivity from her and consuming her sexuality as if it were just another thing.