do you ever just want to gently place your hands on someones cheeks and hold their head there in your hands and looking into their eyes and then violently jerk their head on a right angle and snap their neck
- CORRECT YOURSELF
- THINK BEFORE YOU SPEAK
- USE THE RIGHT NOUNS/PRONOUNS/NAMES FROM NOW ON
- THINK THEY SHOULD JUST ‘DEAL WITH IT’
- SAY THAT IF IT HAPPENED TO YOU IT WOULDN’T BE A BIG DEAL
- DO IT AGAIN
- AND AGAIN
- AND AGAIN
how to tell if a girl likes you:
- you grab her boob & she looks angry ===> she does not like you
- you grab her boob & she does not look angry ===> it’s ok to take off her panties
How to tell if a girl likes you:
- You ask her.
How to tell if a rape-culture perpetuating asshole needs to fall on a knife:
- They make a post like OP just did.
I’ve been seeing some posts/debate recently about where various feminists stand on whether transwomen are women, so here is my opinion:
When Simone de Beauvoir observed that, “One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman,” she was talking about the process of socialization that girls go through for twenty years to become women. Surgery, hormones and fantasies are how you become a transwoman. Even in the realm of gender, transwomen are only like women in the sense that they are human beings. The socialization of both groups doesn’t even touch when it comes to life experience, except again as regards to being human. And yes, there are girlhood experiences that are universal. Lower status based on sex is one of them. Even aside from oppression, girls are born with the expectation that they will or may become mothers one day. That changes life experience in a profound way. You have to be extremely deluded not to see this.
Of course, transwomen are male, biologically, and I call them transwomen, not men, since they want to be different from men. I also refer to them by female pronouns. My views on this are evolving. I spend much more time than I would like learning about trans issues. I really don’t care very much; I just want them to stop oppressing me by demanding entry into women-only spaces and into feminist politics, which they are actively trying to sabotage to make themselves the center of things. But given the transgressions of transwomen toward women’s rights, I have had to become versed in their issues, their language, their reality. This is further proof, if any were needed, that they are my oppressors. In that sense, they are men.
The amount of work you have to do in order to keep oppressing someone is not, in fact, a form of oppression, even if it is positively exhausting.
pogoniptrail, you are the VERY reason people hate all things called “Feminist.” You are a anti-woman, woman. Women are women are women. The “Trans*” in front of that word does NOT negate the “Woman” part. To be a feminist is to be FOR women, period. You are NOT for women. You are FOR women that LOOK LIKE YOU, talk like YOU, walk like YOU, have similar finances to YOU, you are NOT for women. You are FOR YOU. You are not only NOT a feminist, you aren’t a very good woman either. Anti-women, women are the downfall of all womankind.
Before you ask, I am a cis straight women. Perhaps that will make this reply hold more weight for and your ilk. YOU ARE NO FEMINIST.
Actually, racismschool, the reason why people “hate all things called “Feminist”” is because they are products of the patriarchy which does not want to see women liberated. Feminism is hated because it challenges the status quo. The hatred and opposition to feminism is not because feminists acknowledge the difference between sex and gender, but because feminists refuse to allow womanhood and femaleness to be denigrated.
You know, denigration like you thinking that telling pogoniptrail that she “isn’t a very good woman.” Rather hypocritical in the middle of a post where you try to tell her that she’s wrong for making a distinction between different types of women, isn’t it?
Trans women are different from non-trans women. If they weren’t, there would be no need for them to transition. I don’t see how recognizing this difference, acknowledging that they have had to make a choice and struggle to be women, is a negative thing. Shouldn’t we be willing to acknowledge and honor the different experiences that women have?
Well, I wouldn’t ask anyone to “honor” anything they don’t want to… apart from everything else, it seems like cart-before-the-horse territory when we’re fighting for rights and recognition.
But okay, I’ll bite.
What, to you, is an appropriate way to honor the experiences of women who are trans*?
To allow them safety in their own spaces, to work to protect them against the common enemy of all women (men and masculinity), and to work together on joint issues.
Ah. Okay. Women of divergent experience are best honored by being kept in separate spaces.
I did not say “kept.” Do you understand the concept of a safe space for building solidarity? Oppressed groups throughout history have done this. The group comes together to discuss common experiences and form connections with each other, in order to build group identity against the forces that oppress them. These independent spaces allow the groups to develop an understanding of their own selves. As the feminist movement developed, women of color formed their own groups, lesbian women formed their own groups, women who were mothers, women who were poor, who were disabled - forming such groups has been a part of the feminist movement from the beginning.
So trans women have the right (and necessity) to come together in their own space, just as non-trans women do. And as I stated, these groups may then come together to fight common issues.
I’m not sure I agree that this is wise or necessary, but I’m willing to learn more about the notion. So far we have trans* women and cis women. What other categories merit being honored and included through their own space?
I said that above. If you want to read more on this, perhaps you should try reading Black Feminist Thought, Feminism is for Everybody, Sisterhood is Powerful, the Combahee River Statement, or any of the other writings by intersectional feminist authors.
This is great. Seriously, this is great. I’m learning so much from you.
So, if there were one of these groups of women of divergent experience that other groups of women didn’t want to have around or share resources with, all they would have to do is declare everything to be safe space for women who are not a member of that group, leaving the group so excluded… excuse me, I mean so honored … to create their own equivalent on their own.
I want to state again that it is not oppressive for an oppressed group to form their own spaces. Yes, even if there is another group that is “more oppressed” than another. If you were familiar at all with feminist history - or activist organizing today - you would know that what happens is that a group with a large focus (say, misogyny) is not going to be able to meet the needs of all women within that group. So the women with other needs often form their own, either attached to or apart from the larger group. These groups can come together on joint issues, but it is essential for people to be able to have space with those who share their experiences.
Which naturally they would have equal social leverage and resources and visibility to do so… unless for some reason some groups of women have privilege that others don’t, but I can’t see how that could possibly be true. If it were, then the version of intersectionality you describe would be a tool that relatively privileged groups could use to exclude and marginalized groups that are oppressed in relation to themselves… and hey, that clearly can’t be the case, right?
I’m going to be blunt here: in the same way that female women in general had to find their own resources, that lesbian women, women of color, women with disabilities, poor women, etc. - so do trans women. There is not obligation that female women hand over their resources for trans women. Yes, trans women are oppressed. So are female women. If you want to address the source of that oppression, stop blaming other women and turn your attention to men and the patriarchy.
Now that I’ve responded to you, I want to say I don’t take well to sarcasm, and your whole response here makes it clear you aren’t actually interested in a discussion. I will not discuss this with you any further. I’m sure you’ll take that to mean I “give up” or that I have no further points, but I just see no point in engaging with someone whose sole desire is to lay traps.
Listen, you started this by telling me that I am honored by your exclusion of me. If that wasn’t throwing down the gauntlet of sarcasm than I don’t know what is.
I actually do think you’re giving up, and I’m not just saying that because it’s the next move on some cheat sheet or something.
I’m watching you engaging with people on this very thread who are outright hostile to you (no judgment on that hostility either way), but you’re ducking out of conversation with me because of “sarcasm”? Because of “traps”? Okay. You can say that, but I’m pointing out for the interest of anyone else watching how unlikely this seems.
If we were to continue the conversation, we’d have to have some discussion of terms. I am a female woman. “Female” isn’t the opposite of “trans”. It’s an adjective that relates to the same concepts that “woman” relates to as a noun, including (but not limited to) the rather complicated biological concepts we tend to only grapple with in an extremely simplified form.
You can agree or disagree with that and we could have a conversation about it, but you can’t expect that conversations with trans* women can start with “female women” and “non-female women” as a starting point, as a foundation, as a premise. You declare a safe space for female women, or females… we’ll show up. Not to be invasive or aggressive or peevish or perverse. Because we were invited. Because it doesn’t occur to us that anyone who calls herself a feminist would think some women aren’t female.
Because even the vast majority of the people who would exclude us from that selfsame space don’t share your understanding of the term, and would be kicking us out for not being women, with no honor implied.They’d scoff at the idea of non-female women. But the fact that you couldn’t agree with them about why we needed to go—if we were women being honored or men being caught sneaking in—wouldn’t cause you a moment’s hesitation or a twinge of regret.
Now, that’s about vocabulary. Like I said, we can have a conversation about that if you want to, if you think that your terminology has merit and should be accepted you have every right to make a case for it. Moving on to what you actually said in your post:
I don’t blame women for the oppression of women. I hold women who participate in the oppression of women accountable. The main thing I do about it is ask them to stop. All women are oppressed by patriarchy, but cis women are privileged over trans* women by the same system, because patriarchy depends on… absolutely depends on… the idea that “female” and “male” are absolute, unalterable, ironclad categories with no wiggle room, no overlap, and no mobility.
If all other things are equal between a cis woman and a trans* woman, patriarcy will prefer the cis woman. Patriarchy will protect and uphold the cis woman, relative to the trans* woman. Because the cis woman fits into patriarchy’s schemes better.
I don’t demand that “female women” hand over their resources to me. I absolutely recognize the rights and the need of the oppressed to organize in the ways that make sense to them, in the ways that keep them safe and are effective.
If you’re a woman of color and you establish a space for women of color, I will not violate it. I will try to educate other white folks on the importance of doing the same.
But “cis” is a privileged group. It’s a protected, societally sanctioned class to the point where it’s invisible in its ubiquity. It’s one of the ultimate defaults. Most people don’t even have to think about whether it exists, and people who are troubled at finding a label thrust upon “normalcy” are able to dispose of it pretty easily, as you do with your “female women”.
The need for safe spaces for the oppressed is important to the point of sacredness, but it can’t be so carried to the point where the relatively privileged are able to exclude the relatively oppressed. That’s the opposite of intersectionality.
The Keystone XL oil pipeline would pass through multiple Indian reservations, which were formed under treaties that promised undisturbed lands. As the nations residing in those reservations have not approved the construction of KXL, any attempt to proceed with construction would be a violation of these pre-existing treaties.
Will they consider this, probably not. Will be interesting to see how this plays out, settlement, relocation, just all out forced removal or just fuck’em and build it anyways.
How do you support the tribes involved in the pipeline?
I recently received an email from a member of the Winnemem Wintu tribe, and thought I’d share:
Yes, it’s true we have finally won a river closure for our Coming of Age ceremony this Saturday through Tuesday. But the Forest Service says they still can’t close the ceremonial land to outsiders because we are not federally recognized!
We have a long history of government-to-government relations with the U.S., and it is a miscarriage of justice that we are not recognized.
Chief Sisk sent a letter to the BIA Saturday, which stated that “It’s time the BIA stop authorizing human rights abuses against us by proxy by declaring us unrecognized.” She has fasted for 11 days and will continue to do so until she gets a meeting with the BIA to discuss the issue.
Please contact Amy Dutschke, Regional BIA director in Sacramento, urging her to meet with Chief Sisk - (916) 978-6000; (916) 978-6099; email@example.com.
Beedi Yalumina! never give up!
What can I possibly say?
I guess that I miss you, I guess I forgive you
I’m glad you stood in my way.” —
Leonard Cohen, Famous Blue Raincoat (via shortbreadsh)
This is my favorite song of all time
It might be mine too.
I love this song.
That it’s not just some cover up for some gays, but that it is an actual sexual identity.
Oh I remember all the comments I saw too. “hang the nigger” “black women are inherently jealous of white women” “she’s so beautiful of course they would be” Everyone had something to say and then when the cracks started to show SILENCE. You could hear a rat piss on cotton. LOL I think one woman went into hiding because she matched the sketch
Not to mention her lies resulted in a Afro Latina woman getting bleach thrown on her in a possible retaliation. But of course no one paid attention to her and instead focused on the mental state of the poor white woman
Mary Norris on profanity in The New Yorker: http://nyr.kr/OArE2z
this piece made my editor panties wet.
the PSG Selena Fox thing, and it looks like it was handled well, opened up a dialogue, and they re going to be less exclusive and not pull some “blood mystery” shit to exclude trans women from the main women’s rite from now on. Did I miss how things got all fucked up or something? Because that’s not usually how it goes.
I didn’t read it that trans women would be included in main ritual from now on, but I might also have misunderstood?
I know a lot of gay men who are really wonderful, and a lot of straight men who are, too, but ANY man who feels entitled to use conflicts over trans women having access to women’s spaces to get in a few cheap elbows against feminists or Dianic Wicca needs to GROW UP. I just saw a podcast linked where a gay man threw horrible abuse at Selena Fox and Ruth Barrett over what happened at PSG, and that is disgustingly misogynistic - all kinds of misogyny, regular kind AND transmisogyny.
NO. It is NEVER, EVER okay for cissexual men to use trans women as a beating stick against cis women, and I will ALWAYS stand in solidarity with other women - even with other women who disagree with me even calling myself a woman - before I let myself be used as a tool of misogyny.
wait, what the fuck did Selena do? I’mma go google this, but I need to be working.
Having starting to google, I want to make it clear that I am not expressing surprise that exclusionary shit went down, I’m just looking for details.
If you have any more, or alternate links just in case these ever get removed, feel free to add to the list. Pass the resources along!
Black Women Intellectuals (pdf) (from Breaking Bread: Insurgent Black Intellectual Life with Cornel West)
I mean, imagine opening The Sun every day and finding page three adorned with a photo of a pouting specimen of masculinity clad only in his Y-fronts. Imagine naked men sprawling sensuously on the bonnets of new model cars at the motor show. Imagine having to listen to some sweaty and repugnant female version of Bernard Manning telling an endless string of Father-in-Law jokes. Sure, it’s funny once. Maybe it would be funny twice. But three times? Four times? Five thousand times? Can you imagine having to live with something as insulting as that every day of your life? No wonder so many feminists are cranky.
And comics are, in their way, every bit as guilty as other media in presenting a distorted vision of women to their readers. Maybe more guilty in some respects. After all, comics tend to be aimed predominantly at a young audience, an audience that may very well be going through an impressionable stage of their lives and desperately trying to make sense of the world in which they find themselves.” —
Alan Moore, Invisible Girls and Phantom Ladies, 1983
It’s pretty amazing how you could apply this just as readily to the comics industry of today as you could 30 years ago.
Alan Moore, one of the few folks working in the comics medium that THINKS.
Though… Alan Moore’s company is as guilty of drawing for the straight male gaze as the industry standard; their female characters I think have fewer broken spines, but they’re still cringesome. So, if he’s thinking about it, I don’t exactly get why he does this.
Can someone please explain what Marble Hornets is to me? So many of you like it and I have no clue about it.
do you ever feel like you like someone a lot more than they like you and then start to feel like you’re just annoying them because while you always want to talk to them they probably don’t always want to talk to you and it stresses you out a lot and then you just start to feel really depressed about it
Dear Bloggers and Vloggers:
Thank you for you supporting The Siwe Project. If you would like to participate in our first annual No Shame Day on Monday, July 2nd, 2012, we encourage you to do what feels right and to share in a way that feels comfortable to you. Please include the following pertinent information: Who are you? What mental illness are you or your loved one living with? How were you or he/she diagnosed? What propels you to speak publicly about the illness? How are you or your loved one treating the illness (therapy, meds, support groups, exercise, etc) and what prompted you/them to seek treatment?
In the interest of uniformity and solidarity, please begin and end your stories with “My name is ____, and I have No Shame. Please close by encouraging your audience to visit www.thesiweproject.org to share their stories or to hear others’ accounts of their battles with mental illness and to check out @thesiweproject on twitter, hashtag #NoShame. We understand that some of you are not affected by this issue personally and are simply lending your voice in support. We thank you for sharing your words of encouragement in any way you choose and we ask that if you promote the event via twitter, that you also use the hashtag #NoShame.
Thank you again for your willingness to participate in this very important cause. We sincerely appreciate you. While you are free to say whatever you like in your stories, we would like to express that The Siwe Project will only promote those blogs/vlogs that are appropriate in content and context and that are consistent with our mission.
Finally, if you will be participating, please be sure to email Bassey Ikpi at firstname.lastname@example.org or Atrice Williams at email@example.com to let us know when your blog posts on July 2nd.
Thank you again.
I am Bassey Ikpi, and I have No Shame.
Cathy Brennan: You know, I have a lot of respect for people of trans* experience.
Trans* Woman: That seems to be at odds with your behavior towards us.
Cathy Brennan: I believe that trans* women are women and are entitled to the same rights as everyone else.
Trans* Woman: Well, that’s refreshing to hear. I thought…
Cathy Brennan: NO WOMEN HAVE PENISES, GET OVER IT.
Trans* Woman: What?
Cathy Brennan: WOMEN DON’T HAVE PENISES.
Trans* Woman: But I thought you said you believe trans* women are women.
Cathy Brennan: I do.
Trans* Woman: But then you said…
Cathy Brennan: That wasn’t me. I was quoting someone. Geez, get with the program.
Trans* Woman: So you personally accept that some women have penises?
Cathy Brennan: Is it okay if I answer that by quoting someone saying otherwise, then go back to saying that I accept trans* women as women? It would be really convenient for me. Thanks.
Trans* Woman: That… it doesn’t work like that. No.
Cathy Brennan: YOU’RE JUST ANOTHER MAN SILENCING WOMEN.
Trans* Woman: …
Cathy Brennan: That was also a quote.
Trans* Woman: …
You kids are fun. http://bugbrennan.com/brennan-answers-critics/
The awkward moment when nothing in that link actually addresses the stark dichotomy between your “strategic” claim that you accept trans* women as women and the things you choose to reblog/repost that indicate otherwise.
You’ll just throw that link up in response to anything, won’t you? It’s like you’ve decided that all the criticism you have ever or will ever receive is actually rooted along one easily rebutted (in your mind) line and you can “answer” it by reposting that one interview.