Note: OTP means One True Pairing
So, this is 16 random things about me.
Post a photo of yourself: Continue reading “16 Random Things About Yours Truly”
So, I came across this picture on Tumblr.
And beneath it was a whole boat-ton of really shitty comments bashing on the chick who made this for, well, pretty much making it. Except for #2 and #4, obviously. She’s smart on those two. I’m rolling my eyes so hard I can see my brain.
It was a lot of bashing the gender studies’ teacher that was proud of her for doing it, calling the OP “awful” for making it especially because it mentions feminism, it made the post all about bashing on this girl because they think she means “if you hate feminism you must be awful,” and “oh there should be one for guys” and…Apparently people get butthurt if you decide that you don’t want shitty people in your life.
I got pissed off. Why? Because I’m really fucking sick of people bashing on teenage girls that want to be feminist and are trying to discover why feminism exists and what it does. That is the entire reason they bashed on this girl. And I’m the one who’s “overreacting” for feeling that a) it was a very sexist attack and b) it doesn’t have to be about boys vs girls.
I am really fucking sick and tired of people hating on feminist girls for not liking boys all of the time. Because all you are doing is encouraging the stereotype of the man-hating feminist. I am a feminist (a liberal one mind you) and I am pretty much straight. I like boys. I date boys. I have a boy I want to marry.
But let me tell you now, boys are not all that great all of the time. And I really dislike the fact that you want to shit all over some girls that says “I want to date boys but there are some shitty ass men on this planet (I may have even had some encounters with some) so let me classify some of this so that those boys can stay the fuck away from me.” You hate on it and turn it around and be like “Then men need one so they can stay away from you”…
Well you’ve completely missed the point then haven’t you?
If you want to know how I got involved, the girl that this idjit bullied is over at this blog. She’s a sweet girl, and chronicles the unnecessary harassment over on her blog.
Poor sweet Sophia. You have got yourself a bona-fide crazy idiot on your hands. Any sane person reading that original post is going to think the same thing.
As it stands, I have detected nothing wrong in your responses to such character attacks. The only thing I would ever advise you against is reading the comments on the other person’s posts. Just don’t do it. It only causes unnecessary stress. Pretend the comments don’t exist and focus your efforts on the OP because that’s where the attack is coming from. Think of it like a video game boss. OP is the boss, the comments are the little minions trying to distract you. Ignore the minions, take them out with a super move (broad, sweeping comment) and focus the rest of your efforts on dismantling the big mean boss.
Meanwhile, Mr. McCain….
Where do you think you get the right?
Miss Sophia’s blog is a personal one. That is, it is her safe space to talk about what’s going on in her life and to help her explore herself and who she wants to be in this world. Some of her posts don’t even require comments – that’s what the little star “like” button is for. Sometimes the only comments needed are ones that boost her up when she’s feeling down or share in a defining moment. Occasionally she writes articles that incite discussion. Those are for the purpose of hearing the thoughts of others and redefining what she thinks she knows of a certain topic.
Her blog is not, however, here for you to pick and choose behaviors to judge.
[Original post can be found here.]
YES YES YES.
For one, I really truly get annoyed when people confuse biological sex and gender. Because biological sex can’t be controlled, and gender can because gender is the one that’s a social construct. Refusing medical treatment based on your biological sex because you don’t believe in gender shows a basic ignorance of what each of them actually are.
I love your definition of patriarchy and how it couples with andocentrism. What a lot of feminists don’t seem to understand is that the andocentrism is the part that hurts men. I especially liked “assumes that male norms operate throughout all social institutions and become the standard to which persons adhere.” That right there shows just how the patriarchy hurts everyone, male and female alike, because it makes men feel like they need to live up to these standards that are set too high to begin with and these are the standards that are made to hurt women. Doesn’t matter if it makes these men uncomfortable, they need to do it to live up to societal standards.
I also love how you realize that society as a whole – not just males, not just white people, not just [insert group here] – has created the problems we have today. Society is huge and complex and things didn’t just become the way they are by a huge group of people (ex: all the men) with a collective mindset enforcing them that way.
I love how you talk about where the real inequality is. Yes, under the law, women enjoy a much more equal status now than ever before. That doesn’t mean that inequality doesn’t exist. No one went after erectile dysfunction medication and whether or not the Affordable Care Act (ACA) should provide for it. But there were weeks and months of debate about whether birth control (a female only drug) should be provided for. Yes, legally we have the freedom to access an abortion. In reality, it’s nearly unaffordable without insurance and many insurance companies refuse to cover it. Also, depending on your state and how strict the laws are, there may only be a handful of abortion providers for hundreds of thousands of people. Does that sound like equality?
I also saw the inequality being pushed on us in that military thing. So very many people didn’t realize that women did not enjoy the right to fight in a combat position in war. It’s not that we never volunteered; it’s that we were not permitted to do so due to that prevailing point of view that women are too weak to do so. I’m sure there are plenty of (not outright) discriminatory practices that are in place so that women aren’t allowed to work some of the dangerous jobs men do because of that prevailing mindset.
And I enjoy how you talk about the fact that it’s ourselves that are our worst enemies. I actually do not see men doing half of the slut-shaming or judging of women that women do to themselves. None of the men I have dated (and I can count about 7 actual boyfriends) have cared about whether I wore my hair up or down, wore makeup or not, wore perfume or not, shaved or didn’t (actually the only bitch I heard about that was that I needed to maintain it because the grow-in can be scratchy.)
Women, on the other hand, are the most critical of other women. ”She dresses like a slut” “She’s so easy” “It gives men the idea we’re all like that”… when in fact, it doesn’t. We’re just so paranoid. [Which, by the way, is part and parcel of the inequality we’re fighting against and the patriarchy that does, in fact, exist.]
In particular, I think it’s these radfems who spout stuff like “all heterosexual sex is rape” that gives feminism a bad name and makes women (who I would consider feminists, even if they don’t use the term) afraid to be associated with the movement. It gives misogynistic men the evidence to point to when they say “all feminists are crazy” and it gives women such a fright that they won’t say they’re feminists for fear that they’ll end up as forever alone cat ladies because men won’t wanna be near them.
What would you name your future daughter?
Writer’s Block asked:
Sex education in schools is always a topic of discussion. What are your thoughts on the matter — comprehensive sex ed, abstinence only or somewhere in between?
This should shock no one, because anyone who reads this blog should be able to tell I’m a staunch liberal.
Mostly because I don’t believe this deserves to be tacked onto the end of a review the way some of them can be.
What is the most important thing your parents or guardians taught you as a child?
Why is it everyone I encounter seems to think the only way to do things is either not at all or to the absolute extreme? What happened to moderation? You don’t need to eat fast food for every meal, but it doesn’t have to be completely off-limits for the rest of your life either. You don’t need to never move off the couch, but you also don’t need to fill every second of you day with being busy and “doing something.”
This is why I don’t go on Facebook any more. Every time I do it seems like I see someone else’s stupid post about the new extreme thing they did to “try and live a better life.” What happened to living the life you want to live? Why do you feel like you have to live up to everyone else’s standards of a “better” life?
The stand-out post this time was of a woman who, in an effort to show her child that there’s more to life than TV, canceled the cable. Well, that seems like a stupid thing to do. Because when it’s cold or raining or he’s sick, why not have it around to help ease things? You don’t cancel the cable, that’s the extreme way of doing it. How about showing by example? How about taking him out of the house and playing with sidewalk chalk with him? How about teaching him jump rope or the hula hoop? How about sitting and reading instead of watching TV yourself? There’s nothing wrong with limiting the use, but there’s also nothing wrong with watching TV either. I grew up very active, always going outside and reading. But I still watched Sesame Street and Mr. Rogers. I still watched Jeopardy and the news with my family every night. There’s nothing wrong with having a TV. The wrong comes when you let it dominate your life.
I hear people complain all the time that their kids won’t eat what they tell them or won’t do what they tell them. Well you wanna know my parent’s secret? Why they never had kids like that? It’s not because they were super harsh and we were scared of them. And we certainly weren’t the world’s most well-behaved children. Their secret? Do it yourself.
That’s right. If you want your kids to eat veggies, don’t let them see you pushing it around on your plate avoiding it. Eat it yourself, because that lets them know that it’s not something you’re just telling them. It shows them that you believe what you’re saying yourself. If you say “eat your broccoli, it’s tasty” and then don’t eat any yourself, what are they gonna think? But if you chow down on a mound of it, your children are more likely to do the same.
If you say “don’t watch TV, read a book” and then spend 2 hours dicking around on the computer what are they gonna do? But if they see you reading, actively reading something you enjoy, they’re gonna be interested and ask about it and want to do the same. If you want them to go outside more, let them see you taking walks. Invite them with you. Don’t drive down the street because you’re too lazy and then expect your kids to be the epitome of active.
Why does this country have to have only the ridiculously obese because they can’t put the fork down or the totally health-nut skinny people who preach the gospel of vegan to you? Where are the moderates? Where are the people who go “I cook my own dinner 6 out of 7 nights of the week. My dinner consists of a meat, a starch and a veggie. One night a week I give myself a break and I eat out or order a pizza or something.” What’s wrong with that line of thinking?
Why do we feel that exercise needs to be structured and include fancy machines and classes and routines? Why not walk to the store and do bicep curls with the groceries on the way back instead of trying to block out 30-60 minutes of a rather busy day anyway to do something that, let’s face it, most of us aren’t really excited to do. We pay money for gym memberships and classes so we can feel like we’re doing something worthwhile when that money could be better spent on something that you need (like food or the electric bill) or on something that you actually want to have in your life.
There is nothing wrong with owning a computer, owning a cell phone, owning a car or owning a TV. There’s nothing wrong with paying a cable or an internet or a satellite bill. There is nothing wrong with eating at McDonalds or a pizza parlor, or going out to eat at a restaurant. There is nothing wrong with sleeping late on the weekends, going to public school (or paying for college) or working a minimum wage job. Stop with the crusades, with trying to find some big meaningful thing to do. It’s not necessary.
Because we all end up in a tiny pine box. A mighty small drop in a mighty dark plot.
Warning: May Contain Spoilers!
Don’t like? Read the book first.
This book has been often found on book fail lists. One of the reasons why I picked it up was to figure out whether or not it was as bad as people made it out to be. I have to say, I didn’t actually find it a fail. It’s not a fantastic book by any stretch of the imagination, but it wasn’t a fail
Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America is a social experiment book reminiscent of John Howard Griffin’s Black Like Me. The whole idea is that the author, Barbara Ehrenreich, goes “undercover” in a way and finds minimum-wage jobs and see if she can actually live on them the way a good chunk of America currently is. What she finds are the underlying problems that come with trying to live off of a minimum-wage job.