A man in body armor shot nine people, killing three of them, police say.
LAST DAY TO SIGN THE PETITION to investigate#SouthDakota's illegal violations of the rights of Native children and families. We are presenting the signatures to Congress and the Justice Department in D.C. this weekend.
Please sign and share!
"Classypedobear", a men’s rights activist, has some, uh, arguments against the Bechdel test and why some movie theaters in Sweden should not care about diversity in media representation for women:
This test is BS, simply. I think what they are trying to accomplish is noble but that is where the good stops.
Why do Women need to talk to each other ? I don’t get it. I have plenty of female friends who get along better with males. If two women hav a conversation about their kitten or their baby ? I think it’s even worse.
Bad idea overall
“Why do women need to talk to each other ?" indeed.
The best part? It received almost 40 upvotes from the Men’s Rights subreddit.
But wait, don’t men’s rights activists always talk about how much they care about child sexual abuse? Why is someone named “Classypedobear” even allowed to post in such a supposedly caring community, let alone get 40 upvotes for a contribution to that community? Isn’t this just contributing to the false stereotype that men aren’t to be trusted around children?
Why am I asking so many questions I know I’ll never receive a satisfying answer for from a hate group?
her talk was titled ”With My Mind Set on Freedom: Black Feminism, Intersectionality and Social Justice” and it was wonderful. She discussed current events such as Trayvon Martin, the Obama Presidency, the ways social media has grown as a tool of activism among youth and the importance of intergenerational relationships and lessons.
i was lucky enough to co-facilitate a graduate workshop with her and two other grad students. i think the body of the talk and the workshop will be separate posts.
But at the end of the talk, their was a question and answer section. I had decided to ask her a similar question I asked Kimberle Crenshaw. How do you feel about the ways white feminists have taken your work on intersectionality as a feminist way to be more inclusive while erasing the creations as part of a Black feminist tradition and without a dedication to Black women’s lives in any way?
She gave an anecdote. She asked if the House of Blues was still in Cambridge or Boston. We said yes. Recently I was at a Bootsy Collins show there, maybe a year ago. So yes, it was there. I was so suprised when I arrived. And she elaborated on why with her anecdote.
She said what has become of her work on intersectionality and Crenshaw’s as well is what has been done to Blues, Jazz and Rock. When I went to the Bootsy Collins show I was actually appalled at how WHITE the audience was. these are NOT true Bootsy fans or lovers. but once whiteness gets their grasp on something they love that Black people have created, they have to make it more and more inaccessible to Black people while also whitening it to be no longer noticeable as a Black creation.
what i love about her response is that she didn’t use the word appropriation once. she simply said, over the years, Blues and Jazz has become almost unrecognizable. white men who wanted that feel, that experience, went on to imitate the sounds and creations without actually having the background experience. structurally, some of these things end up similar. however, the heart and soul of the creation is gone and the creators have been erased. when Black fans can’t go see Bootsy Collins at the House of Blues because of the cost or white men are continually praised as the creators and best artists in Blues, Jazz and Rock n Roll, the complete erasure and appropriation of that creation has taken place.
this is what White Feminism has done to intersectionality. White Feminism has no commitment to Black women. to our lives, our narratives, our concerns or our histories. Patricia Hill Collins had and has a complete and total commitment to Black women. her work is based on a long standing oral and academic tradition of remembering and honoring those who came before her. who helped to shape these ideas. and most importantly, they center the Black womans experience in all of it.
intersectionality is meant as a bottom up approach, not a top down approach. those with power cannot be “intersectional”. you are also not living intersectional experiences. intersectionality was always about exposing the ways Black women are caught up in multiple systems of oppression, namely race, gender and class, but often many more. it is meant to help Black women understand their experiences in a white supremacist patriarchal culture like the U.S. or much of Western nations that have applied this model onto most cultures from the outside. most importantly, it is meant to help Black women see the ways their experiences are connected to one another and not a product of self-deficiency but structural real systems that have cultural and economic benefits for ruling/dominant classes.
understanding Black women live intersectional experiences gives us insight into the ways race, gender and class, heterosexism and more all work together in ways that restrict Black womens access to resources. and access to resources is what is really one of the most important things needed in Black women’s lives. which white feminism is not committed to in any way. when Black women learn more about classism, sexism, racism, heterosexism and more (such as transmisogyny, islamophobia, convicted felon status, etc) and how they work, we learn more about how we can define ourselves without those systems imposing our identities onto us. we can also learn more about how to combat and navigate these systems.
ultimately, Patricia Hill Collins work is very revolutionary and radical for Black women. it is not about how to full-scale change the world or to tear the system down. it is about exposing historical oppression and cultural beliefs, our position as Black American women living in a nation birthed from slavery and genocide, to allow Black women tools to define themselves, to see a long term history of scholarly and community work, to understand more about one another and ourselves, to push against these systems and to push more Black women to make their own discoveries that will make living as a Black woman in these societies easier, more manageable and more accessible. while she does not address or make specific policy suggestions, she is working to empower and educate Black women about ourselves and our ancestors and how WE CAN DO THESE THINGS.
when you’re white saying your an intersectional feminist, you are wrong. you are the white boy singing sad songs to a blues twang claiming to be a Blues artist. you are the miley who wears black womens bodies and perceived sexualities as fun identities to put on and off, without living within those experiences always and forever. it is erasure, it is warping, it is the continual narrative of whiteness as a dominant force, in opposing the creators and destroying the creators while then attempting to re-create those creations with whiteness firmly installed inside of it. which is false, warped, fake and without heart and soul. it is a lifeless imitation. and mostly, it isn’t REAL.
When you’re a straight white men’s rights activist, it makes sense that the civil rights issue of your time is creepshaming.
Theodore Beale, a “pickup artist” and now, an apologist for shooting girls in the head if they dare seek an education.
There are no words.
Bravo! The Men’s Rights movement finally gets some major press by way of The Daily Beast…Except it’s the sort of press that is completely accurate in portraying the movement’s horrifying misogyny and pathetic lack of actual advocacy for men who need help.
For more information on the article, check out this excellent synopsis over at manboobz.com.
Paul Elam, the author of the above quote and one of the major voices of the men’s rights activism movement, will be featured on 20/20 today (Friday, October 18) at 10pm Eastern on ABC.
Watch it! Or don’t. Just remember that men’s rights has nothing to do with advocating for men and everything to do with heartless misogyny and advocating violence against women (and anyone else who is seen as contributing to a culture where men are brutally oppressed by a feminist shadow conspiracy).
I never had to come out as fat.
When you grow up overweight, everyone notices — not just your classmates, who are too young to have mastered the art of tact, but also friends’ parents and teachers. I knew I was fat because people told me I was fat, either directly (a slap to the stomach and an unkind word) or in subtler ways (having a teacher rifle through my lunch box and comment on the contents). I felt shame over my size long before I had any concept of my sexuality, and years after coming out as gay, I still feel anxious identifying as fat.
As an openly gay writer, one of the questions I’m asked most often is, “Were you bullied growing up?” And the answer is yes, but it’s never the answer they’re looking for. In many ways I was lucky to have come of age in a liberal enclave where my sexuality was accepted if not embraced. Oh, sure, I’ve had the word “f*ggot” hurled at me — and the sad truth is, I’d be shocked if a gay man hadn’t — but it was always secondary. The real source of my bullying was the extra weight I’ve carried since childhood. I can count on one hand the number of times I’ve been called a “f*ggot” to my face, but I couldn’t tell you how often someone has made a dig about my weight…
New research shows works by writers such as Charles Dickens and Téa Obreht sharpen our ability to understand others’ emotions – more than thrillers or romance novels
If you’re still spouting bullshit racist rhetoric about how “we’re all human, man” I’m going to have to stop you right there because there have been peer-reviewed and published studies that state plainly that being “colorblind” is a form of racism and increases interracial tension.
For mainstream American liberals, its not enough to outright minimize or deny the existence of structured racial inequality in America, as well as their own shrouded prejudice and this is what especially aggravates me about their politics, against, lets say a hardened conservative. They have to violate important/vulnerable spaces and conversations to “politely engage” with you about your “overreacting” and “reading too much into issues” as well. For liberals, racism is either the extent of joining white supremacist groups, or it doesn’t exist. Its not the motivations behind gentrification, cultural appropriation, tokenization, white savior complexes, pinkwashing, police brutality, neoimperialism, etc. The insidious manner in which white supremacist attitudes/notions are state sanctioned and transformed into policies are too difficult to read into or properly dissect in our illustrious “post-racial” society. Not only do liberals not want to engage in such analytical discussions that interrogate the nature of racial dynamics, but they will propose you don’t either, because that’s divisive. You cause our demise as a society when you dare to discuss your own suffering and pose the residual effects of documented -isms this nation has inflicted on your demographic.
That’s typical liberal logic.
That to me is more dangerous than conservatism, especially in a post-civil rights, black president era that requires more covert policies. The emotional manipulation and mental gymnastics it requires most liberals to patently ignore economical, judicial and geopolitical disparity amongst most racialized groups and the dominant white class in favor of arguments such “well whose stopping you now? there aren’t any “no coloreds allowed” signs anymore”. In an age where “race is no longer a detrimental factor”, exploitation of inner city youth through the prison industrial complex becomes an issue that black people are responsible for, dead Yemeni children are an unfortunate case, but “necessary collateral damage to fight the enemy” and Congress “needs to intervene” in foreign affiars when political turmoil arises in any given region, though America has been an empire for the past century, that has its claws on the throats of most nations.
Neoliberalism upholds the status quo, while sparing a couple cheap niceties about oppressed classes and is then regarded as the dichotomous factor to conservatism.